Non‑statutory guidance for public services boards and regional partnership boards: Assessments, data and evidence

This guidance supports Public Services Boards (PSBs) and Regional Partnership Boards (RPBs) as they prepare their statutory assessments under 2 separate Acts. PSBs complete well-being assessments under the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, and RPBs complete Population Needs Assessments (PNAs) under the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014. Although these duties originate from different legislation, both require balanced evidence, meaningful involvement and consideration of longer-term needs through future trends.

Partners have told us that the landscape can feel complex, with overlap across themes, evidence requirements and engagement activity.

This non-statutory guidance aims to provide clarity within this shared space, offering practical suggestions to help PSBs and RPBs align work where appropriate, while still meeting the distinct statutory requirements of each Act. It is intended for board members, board coordinators, analysts, engagement leads and anyone contributing to the evidence that informs the assessments.

This guidance is intended to support you to:

• build shared evidence base where it makes sense to do so
• coordinate engagement with communities and partners
• take a consistent and proportionate approach to analysis
• support consistent use of high quality and recognised data sources
•  explicitly  link evidence and decisions, and
• support clearer, more coherent assessments across your region

Welsh Government recognise that regions differ in size and partnership structures. This guidance does not mandate a single joint assessment; PSBs and RPBs retain their autonomy to complete individual assessments where this is in their best interest.

This guidance should be read as supporting an ongoing cycle of assessment, planning, delivery and review, rather than a standalone or one‑off exercise. Assessments are expected to build on the evidence, learning and priorities identified in previous well‑being assessments, well‑being plans, Population Needs Assessments and Area Plans, deepening understanding over time and responding to emerging trends rather than re‑starting analysis at each cycle.

This section provides an overview of the statutory frameworks for PSBs and RPBs. It summarises the key duties under each Act and highlights where requirements naturally align.

PSBs complete well-being assessments under the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 (WFG Act), which requires an assessment of economic, social, environmental and cultural well-being for the local authority area, including analysis at community-area level. The WFG Act also requires PSBs to consider national well-being indicators, statutory Future Trends Reports and the five ways of working. These assessments inform the development of a Well-being Plan which sets out the well-being objectives that the PSBs deliver over the next 5 years.

RPBs complete Population Needs Assessments under the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014, which requires an assessment of care and support needs, carers’ needs, the range and level of services required and how services will be delivered through the medium of Welsh. PNAs must inform Area Plans and Market Stability Reports.

Although the legislative duties are distinct, both assessments require balanced use of qualitative and quantitative evidence, meaningful involvement of people and communities, and consideration of how needs may change in the future. These similarities create opportunities for coordinated work across PSBs and RPBs and for the development of shared analytical products.

Under the Environment (Wales) Act 2016, Natural Resources Wales publishes the State of Natural Resources Report (SoNaRR) every 5 years, providing a national assessment of the condition of Wales’s natural resources and the drivers and pressures affecting them, including social and economic influences. While PSBs view 'environmental well-being' as the broad goal of a healthy, thriving natural environment, NRW’s four aims for the Sustainable Management of Natural Resources (SMNR) define exactly what that looks like in practice. Because the SMNR aims focus on safeguarding resources, building resilient ecosystems, creating healthy places, and driving a circular economy, achieving these 4 aims is simply the practical mechanism for delivering environmental well-being.

At a regional scale, Area Statements translate this national evidence into place-based insight on environmental risks, opportunities and priorities. Together these sources can provide useful context when considering environmental well-being within both assessments.

The Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 and Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 share similar principles of working.

This comparison is intended to support early planning discussions by clarifying the distinct statutory responsibilities of PSBs and RPBs and highlighting where joint work is possible.

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.

This section provides a practical overview of how roles and responsibilities are typically organised across PSBs and RPBs. Rather than duplicating statutory requirements, it sets out how each partnership usually approaches its assessment duties, and how responsibilities can be coordinated in practice. This section intends to support early planning discussions about leadership, contributions and shared work.

PSBs focus primarily on place-based well-being, while RPBs focus on care and support needs. Each partnership leads its own statutory assessment; however, both carry out similar tasks such as gathering evidence, involving people, analysing trends and interpreting insight.

PSBs usually lead work that is:

• Area wide and community focused, drawing on insight about place, population trends and community well-being. This includes drawing on existing community voice evidence and working with partners to involve people whose voices are seldom heard. For the purposes of this guidance, “seldom heard” may include people facing structural barriers to participation, such as social or economic disadvantage, protected characteristics, higher‑risk or marginalised groups, or barriers linked to geography or digital access.
• Strategic and collaborative, bringing multiple public bodies (and other members) together to explore shared well-being issues.
• Longterm in nature, using future trends and the five ways of working to inform the PSB’s well-being plans.
• Broad in evidence needs, combining data, perceptions and qualitative experience from across communities.

RPBs usually lead work that is:

• Region-wide population group focused, exploring needs such as older people, children and young people, carers, disabled people and others. This includes engagement with people with lived experience and carers across priority groups, ensuring diverse voices are represented.
• Service oriented, relating insight to the range and level of services required, delivered in partnership, that responds to the diversity of the population, including Welsh-medium provision.
• Demand and sufficiency focused, supporting 5-year Area Plans and Market Stability Reports.

Roles may differ across partnerships, but early clarity on leadership, contribution and decision‑making processes can help avoid duplication and support more coherent assessments. Clear expectations about who leads, who contributes and how work is shared can reduce duplicated effort and support a consistent regional narrative.

• Clear contribution roles: Where one partnership leads, the other can contribute insight, data or expertise without duplicating effort.
• Communication and governance: Agreeing how findings will be presented to both boards can support a coherent story across the region.

PSBs and RPBs may wish to agree a shared approach to engagement that avoids duplication, aligns timelines and reduces burden on communities and stakeholders. A coordinated approach can help both partnerships draw on a common base of community insight, lived experience and stakeholder views. Partnerships may wish to identify a joint engagement lead or working group to coordinate activity, maintain an overview of existing insight and ensure engagement activity is inclusive, bilingual and proportionate across both duties.

To strengthen this joint approach, partnerships may also wish to:

• Make deliberate efforts to involve people whose voices are often under‑represented, including those who may not typically participate in formal engagement.
• Use trusted intermediaries, community organisations and tailored methods to reach people who are hardest to engage, ensuring engagement activities are culturally sensitive and accessible.
• Review existing community insight and citizen voice evidence to assess sufficiency, identifying demographic, spatial or thematic gaps and determining where further engagement is needed.
• Reduce engagement fatigue by aligning engagement cycles, sharing insight across both partnerships and combining activities where appropriate.

A shared approach to engagement helps ensure that both assessments are informed by a diverse and robust range of views, supports more consistent interpretation of evidence and reduces unnecessary burden on communities.

The expectations in this section have been developed collaboratively by a National Assessment and Advice Task Group, drawing on statutory guidance, previous cycles and feedback from partnerships. The expectations do not replace legal duties. Instead, they set out practical commitments that national bodies and local partnerships may wish to adopt to support clarity and alignment across the next assessment cycle.

National bodies understand the pressures that partnerships face and are committed to helping make the process manageable and purposeful. National bodies, are committed to:

• Provide clear, consistent and aligned advice informed by statutory guidance and emerging learning.
• Offer practical tools and resources to support proportionate and aligned approaches.
• Support access to core datasets, national indicators, research and future trends insight.
• Facilitate shared learning and peer support across regions.
• Encourage balanced approaches that blend quantitative data, qualitative insight and lived experience in a transparent and practical way.

PSBs and RPBs may wish to use these expectations to guide early planning and support a shared approach across the region. As partnerships, you should:

• Take a balanced and transparent approach to evidence, explaining how it shaped your conclusions.
• Coordinate engagement where feasible, using inclusive and bilingual methods and demonstrating how people’s input informed your assessment.
• Strengthen involvement by ensuring the voices of people who are seldom heard are proactively included, using proportionate, accessible and culturally sensitive methods.
• Draw on existing insight from communities, carers and service users, identifying any gaps in demographic or geographic coverage before undertaking new engagement.
• Apply Welsh language, equalities and socio‑economic considerations consistently and explicitly.
• Adopt proportionate, realistic methods, documenting assumptions and limitations clearly.
• Agree local expectations for drafting, evidence quality and analytical assurance.
• Explore shared approaches to futures and scenario planning where appropriate.
• Take a life course approach from early years to end of life to ensure comprehensive need of communities and ensure a focus on Palliative End of Life Care need (i.e. Start well, Live well, Age well, End Well).

This shared set of expectations helps create a clearer, more coherent approach across the two duties. It provides confidence about what national bodies will support, and clarity on how partnerships can approach their responsibilities in a way that is achievable and effective. It supports more consistent interpretation of evidence, reduces duplication, and strengthens the link between assessments and the plans that follow.

These expectations are not statutory, but they reflect good practice identified across Wales. Joint expectations can help create consistent standards and support clarity for those contributing to the assessments. These expectations support proportionate and balanced assessments that draw on multiple forms of evidence.

It is important that assessments are underpinned by a proportionate, balanced and transparent use of evidence and both national bodies and local partnerships have a role in facilitating this. Partnerships should draw on a broad range of evidence, including official statistics, administrative data, research, community insights, lived experience and environmental evidence, to develop a shared understanding of local well-being and care and support needs. Partnerships should prioritise the use of trusted, quality-assured and recognised sources of evidence, where possible, and the use of common datasets, indicators and definitions can help improve consistency across Wales and support comparison between places. Where alternative or locally generated evidence is used, partnerships should be transparent about methods used and any limitations. Annex C includes further guidance on different sources of data and evidence, their strengths and their limitations.

Assessments should focus on interpreting evidence rather than reproducing large volumes of data. The emphasis should be on explaining what the evidence shows, why it matters locally and how it helps, identifying strengths, challenges, inequalities and emerging trends. Partnerships should ensure that the findings, conclusions and priorities included with the assessments can be traced back to the data, research and evidence collected and analysed. In addition, assessments should outline the approach taken to data collection and analysis, including any limitations or considerations that may affect how the evidence can be interpreted.

To support transparency partnerships may wish to maintain a supporting data catalogue or similar resource to record key datasets, research and insight used in the assessment. This enables assessments to remain focused on strategic interpretation and collective priorities, while ensuring transparency about the evidence base. A clear approach to evidence collection, analysis and presentation  helps strengthen consistency across partnerships, reduce duplication, identify evidence gaps and support more informed, future-focused decision making. To assist with this Annex C includes further information on approaches to data and evidence as part of the assessment process.

The aim of prioritisation is to turn the evidence gathered as part of the assessments into a clear and manageable set of issues that the partnership can act on collectively. Rather than producing long lists or extensive thematic chapters, partnerships may wish to focus on identifying a small number of priorities where joint effort will have the greatest impact. This reflects a shift in approach: from describing everything that matters, to concentrating on the issues that require coordinated, strategic action across the partnership.

Focusing on a smaller number of priorities at the assessment stage does not remove the expectation that wider evidence has been considered. Partnerships may undertake broad analysis internally while choosing to publish a more selective narrative, ensuring that important issues are not overlooked even where they do not emerge as priorities for collective action at this stage.

In this guidance, references to “priorities” describe the small number of key issues emerging from the assessment that require partnership attention. These are not formal Welsh Government statutory priorities or objectives but what has been identified through a needs assessment exercise.

For PSBs, statutory well-being objectives are set later as part of Well-being Plan development, following local government elections and potentially involving a different PSB membership. For RPBs, formal commitments are agreed through the Area Plan and Market Stability Report.

We encourage partnerships to identify a focused set of priorities at the assessment stage, as this supports clearer, more strategic planning later on. A small number of priorities where collective action is essential and no single organisation can deliver change alone, provides a stronger basis for developing Well being Objectives, Area Plan priorities and coordinated partnership commitments.

These priorities should be informed by a broad and representative range of voices, including communities and groups whose experiences are less often reflected in formal engagement.

Prioritisation should bring together the full range of insight available – quantitative data, qualitative evidence including community voice, lived experience and professional judgement – and translate this into a shared understanding of what matters most. At this stage, it may be particularly helpful to consider how each issue might develop in the coming years, using simple futures and scenario planning techniques to explore opportunities, risks or emerging pressures e.g.  Future Trends Report. Partnerships may wish to draw on support from organisations such as the Hwb Dyfodol who can offer PSBs support in futures and long-term thinking, and/or Public Health Wales for systems thinking approaches.

Partnerships may find it helpful to structure this stage around a small number of questions:

1. What does the evidence consistently show?
   Consider priorities that appear across quantitative data, qualitative insight and community voice.
2. Why does this matter for well-being or for care and support in your area?
   Reflect on the implications for people, communities or services.
3. What are the underlying causes of this priority?
   Partnerships may wish to explore the factors, behaviours, pressures or conditions that are creating or reinforcing the priority, rather than focusing only on what is most visible. Understanding underlying causes can help identify where early intervention and preventative action may be effective.
4. How does lived experience reinforce the importance of this priority?  Pay particular attention to groups whose voices are less often represented. 
5. Where does the partnership add value?
   Focus on priorities that cannot be addressed effectively by any single organisation acting alone.
6. What is within the partnership’s gift to change or influence? 
   This can help distinguish between priorities suited to collective action and those issues driven by factors beyond local control.
7. How might this priority change over time?
   Use futures thinking to explore what may happen over the next 5 to 10 years.
8. Is collective action feasible and proportionate?
   Be realistic about influence, resources and timing.

These prompts are not intended as a scoring framework. They are simply a way to support reflective, evidence‑informed discussion.

The following example illustrates how one PSB has approached prioritisation using evidence and collective influence:

The output of this stage should be a short narrative that explains the priorities chosen and the reasoning behind them. This narrative does not need to be lengthy. It simply needs to:

• describe the small number of priorities identified
• summarise the evidence and insight that led to them
• explain why they require partnership‑wide action
• reflect briefly on how the priority may change in future
• set the direction for more detailed exploration during planning

Supporting data, analysis and community insight do not need to be embedded in the assessment although the rationale for each priority should be transparent, and readers should be able to identify the principal evidence, data sources, research and engagement findings that support each key conclusion and priority. Partnerships have flexibility in how they choose to do this. Partnerships may wish to do this through the use of live dashboards, annexes or data catalogue or within the body of the assessment, if they wish to do so. Partnerships should provide a clear list of key evidence sources considered, rather than reproducing detailed analytical outputs. This enables clarity for readers without requiring the publication of every dataset, chart or detailed analysis.

Data catalogues and supporting material

Partnerships should maintain a record of the principal datasets, research and insight used in developing the assessment. This should be incorporated within the assessment, published as a data catalogue, technical annex or maintained through an accessible digital resource. As part of the assessments, it is important that the methodology and approach used to inform the assessment is clear, and that any limitations with the methodology are noted clearly. To enable the assessments to be focussed it is recognised that a summary of the methodology may be appropriate in the assessment itself, and that a more detailed overview of the approach may be provided as a technical annex.

Partnerships may also find it helpful to give themselves explicit permission to keep the assessment process proportionate. This may include focusing on depth rather than breadth, avoiding unnecessary technical detail, and recognising that not every issue identified in the evidence will become a priority.

Assessments must be published by PSBs and RPBs in line with statutory requirements. Partnerships may choose different publication formats, including web first formats, interactive digital content, or traditional reports, as long as outputs are accessible, bilingual and transparent.

Publication should make clear how evidence, engagement and futures insight have informed findings, conclusions and priorities set out in the assessment. Readers should be able to understand what evidence was used, where it came from and how it contributed to the assessment's conclusions. What is published should focus on the narrative, the reasoning behind the chosen priorities and a simple list of key evidence sources, rather than the full analytical content. Detailed data, analysis and engagement summaries do not need to be reproduced within the assessment itself. However, partnerships should ensure that the key supporting evidence is accessible through linked annexes, data catalogues, dashboards or other supporting resources.

The diagram below summarises the distinction between:

• the work undertaken during the assessment
• the outputs that need to be published

It is intended to support a proportionate approach, where partnerships undertake rich analytical and engagement work, but publish only what is needed to justify and explain their agreed priorities.

Image

This infographic summarises the approach to assessment and publication set out in the guidance for Public Services Boards (PSBs) and Regional Partnership Boards (RPBs). It illustrates how partnerships should build on existing evidence, data, research, engagement and lived experience to understand well-being, needs and inequalities, identify a small number of priorities, and demonstrate how evidence has informed conclusions. It also summarises the information expected to be published in assessments, including key findings, future trends, priorities, evidence sources and supporting resources. The infographic emphasises that assessments should be proportionate, accessible, evidence-informed and focused on collective action.

The assessment should demonstrate a clear line of sight between evidence, analysis, findings, priorities and subsequent plans. Supporting materials, such as data catalogues, methodologies, dashboards and technical annexes, can be used to support transparency while allowing the assessment itself to remain focused on interpretation, priorities and collective action.

These annexes are proposed for development and will be shaped through further engagement with PSBs, RPBs and regional analytical teams. Regions can adapt or add to these annexes as needed.

• Annex A: PSB statutory requirements checklists
• Annex B: RPB statutory requirements checklist
• Annex C: Data, grey literature and qualitative insight
• Annex D: Regional data catalogue
• Annex E: Glossary of key terms

Preparing an assessment of Local Well-being

This annex sets out the statutory requirements that a Public Services Board (PSB) must meet when preparing, consulting on, and publishing its assessment of local well-being under Part 4 of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015.

It is intended to support boards in ensuring that all legal duties are met in a clear, consistent and demonstrable way, while allowing appropriate flexibility in how the assessment is developed and presented.

How to use this annex

Purpose

This annex provides a practical checklist of statutory requirements to support:

• planning and drafting
• internal assurance
• governance and scrutiny

All requirements set out below must be met unless otherwise stated.

Summary of statutory requirements

Interpreting and demonstrating the requirements

The term ‘must’ reflects a statutory duty. This annex does not replace the statutory guidance and should be read alongside it.

The checklist restates statutory requirements rather than quoting directly, to ensure clarity, consistency and ease of use. Boards should ensure that the intent of each statutory duty is fully met.

Boards should be able to demonstrate how each requirement has been met, how evidence has informed analysis and how findings and conclusions have been reached. This will support effective scrutiny, accountability and confidence in the robustness of the assessment.

Statutory checklist

1. Duty to produce and timing

☐ The PSB must prepare and publish an assessment of local well-being.
☐ The assessment must be published no later than one year before the publication of the local well-being plan.
☐ The assessment must be published within the 12 months preceding an ordinary local government election.

2. Core content requirements

2.1 Defining the area

☐ The assessment must identify and set out the communities that comprise the PSB area.

Community areas should reflect meaningful local geographies and variation within the area, rather than relying solely on administrative boundaries.

2.2 Analysis of well-being

The assessment must analyse the state of economic, social, environmental and cultural well-being:

☐ for each community, and
☐ for the area as a whole.

☐ The assessment must analyse the well-being of people living in the area.

The level of detail should be sufficient to support robust conclusions, rather than exhaustive.

2.3 Additional analytical requirements

☐ The assessment must include any further analysis carried out by the board.
☐ The assessment must include any other relevant data and information the board considers appropriate.

The structure and format of the assessment is for the PSB to determine, provided statutory requirements are met.

3. Future focus

☐ The assessment must include predictions of future likely trends in well-being across all four dimensions.
☐ The assessment must have regard to the Welsh Ministers’ Future Trends Report (where relevant).

4. National framework alignment

☐ The assessment must refer to the national indicators.

5. Use of evidence

☐ The PSB must use a wide range of evidence and analysis to inform the assessment.
☐ The evidence base must include both quantitative and qualitative sources, where appropriate.

The assessment does not need to reproduce all underlying data. Data may be summarised, referenced or signposted where this supports clarity and accessibility.

The approach to evidence should be proportionate, focusing on material issues affecting well-being in the area.

6. Integration of other statutory assessments

The PSB must take into account relevant statutory reviews and assessments, including:

☐ climate change risk assessments
☐ childcare and nursery sufficiency assessments
☐ play sufficiency assessments
☐ population needs assessments
☐ crime, disorder, substance misuse and reoffending strategic assessments
☐ relevant environmental area statements

The assessment does not need to duplicate these assessments but should draw on and reference them appropriately.

7. Consideration of people and inequalities

☐ The assessment must consider the well-being of people in the area.

In doing so, the PSB must have regard to the needs of different groups, including:

☐ vulnerable or disadvantaged people
☐ people with protected characteristics
☐ children and young people
☐ people who need care and support, and carers*

* This requirement relates to understanding well-being at a population level. The assessment should draw on existing evidence, including population needs assessments, and does not require duplication of detailed care and support needs analysis undertaken through Regional Partnership Boards.

8. Sustainable development principle

☐ The PSB must apply the sustainable development principle in preparing the assessment.

This includes:

☐ taking a long-term approach
☐ considering prevention
☐ involving relevant people and communities

9. Consultation requirements

Before publication

The PSB must consult specified persons, including:

☐ the Future Generations Commissioner
☐ invited participants
☐ other partners
☐ the local authority scrutiny committee
☐ relevant voluntary organisations
☐ representatives of residents and businesses
☐ trade unions
☐ other persons with an interest in well-being
☐ The PSB must provide consultees with a draft assessment.
☐ The PSB must allow sufficient time for meaningful consideration and feedback.

10. Publication and distribution

Following publication, the PSB must send the assessment to:

☐ Welsh Ministers
☐ the Future Generations Commissioner
☐ the Auditor General for Wales
☐ the local authority scrutiny committee

11. Governance and responsibility

☐ The assessment must be agreed and published jointly by all statutory members of the PSB.
☐ The function of preparing and publishing the assessment must not be delegated to sub-groups.

Preparing a population needs assessment

This annex sets out the statutory requirements that Section 2 of the Social Service and (Well-being) Wales Act 2014.

It is intended to support boards in ensuring that all legal duties are met in a clear, consistent and demonstrable way, while allowing appropriate flexibility in how the assessment is developed and presented.

How to use this annex

Purpose

This annex provides a practical checklist of statutory requirements to support:

• planning and drafting
• internal assurance
• governance and scrutiny

All requirements set out below must be met unless otherwise stated, i.e. should statements are guidelines only.

Summary of statutory requirements

Categories taken from Section 2 of the Social Service and (well-being) Wales Act 2014 Codes of Practice.

Population needs assessment – Statutory “must” checklist

1. Core duty (Section 14)

☐ Local authorities and health boards must jointly carry out an assessment of:

• people who need care and support
• carers who need support

☐ The assessment must identify:

• unmet needs
• the range and level of services required
• the range and level of preventative services required
• how services will be delivered through the medium of Welsh

2. Partnership arrangements

☐ Local authorities must form a partnership arrangement with the health board for the assessment
☐ Specified partnership arrangements must be in place to undertake the assessment
☐ A single combined population needs assessment report must be produced per health board area

3. Producing the report

☐ A population needs assessment report must be produced
☐ Local authorities and health boards must formally approve the report
☐ The report must be published on partner websites
☐ A copy must be sent to Welsh Ministers at publication

4. Assessment content (Section 1 – Needs)

☐ Local authorities and health boards must jointly assess:

• extent of people needing care and support
• extent of carers needing support
• extent of unmet needs

☐ The report must include assessments of priority population groups (as specified in the code)
☐ The assessment must reflect:

• current needs
• future trends and long-term challenges

5. Assessment content (Section 2 – Services)

☐ Local authorities and health boards must jointly assess:

• the range and level of services required
• the range and level of preventative services required
• the actions needed to deliver services through Welsh

☐ Section 2 must include the assessment of preventative services required under section 15.

6. Equality and legal duties

☐ Local authorities and health boards must undertake an Equality Impact Assessment, covering all protected characteristics

7. Engagement duties

☐ A broad range of individuals and organisations must be involved in the assessment process
☐ Engagement must include:

• citizens (including children and seldom-heard groups)
• carers
• third and private sector providers 

☐ Local authorities and health boards must establish and publicise a procedure for obtaining people’s views (from core text)
☐ The report must set out how engagement has taken place (citizens and providers)

8. Timetable and cycle

☐ Local authorities and health boards must produce one report per local government electoral cycle

9. Review and updating

☐ The partnership arrangement must keep the report under review
☐ The report must be reviewed at least mid-cycle
☐ If significant change occurs, an addendum must be produced, published, and sent to Welsh Ministers (from core text obligations and summary)

10. Welsh Language duty

☐ The assessment must identify:

• need for services in Welsh
• the range and level of Welsh-language provision required
• gaps in provision

☐ Section 2 must identify actions required to deliver services through Welsh

11. Governance and delivery

☐ Partnership bodies must produce one combined report covering:

• each local authority area
• the whole health board area

☐ Partners must participate in the assessment process (via the partnership governance arrangements)
☐ Partners must share information required for the assessment

This annex sets out a high level approach to using data, evidence and insight in a way that is proportionate, purposeful and aligned across PSBs and RPBs. It is not intended to add burden or prescribe detailed technical requirements. Instead, it offers practical permissions and expectations to support a more streamlined assessment process, focused on the collective priorities that partnerships can meaningfully influence.

A proportionate and purposeful assessment

We encourage partnerships to take a proportionate approach to evidence and analysis. The purpose of the assessment is not to produce an encyclopaedic report. Instead, it should provide a clear narrative that:

• describes what the evidence shows
• sets out key assumptions, limitations and evidence gaps, including where data is dated, incomplete or unavailable, and what this means for interpretation.
• highlights what matters most
• explains why certain issues emerge as priorities
• demonstrates why partnership‑wide action is needed

Partnerships should set out what evidence they have drawn on, for example, a list of key datasets, sources, research and community insights. Readers should be able to identify the evidence underpinning key claims, conclusions and priorities and that any limitations or gaps are clearly acknowledged. This may be incorporated within the assessment, published as a data catalogue, technical annex or maintained through an accessible digital resource. The key expectation is that the assessment tells a clear story about how the evidence has informed the findings and that the relevant evidence is clearly accessible.

Practical permissions for working with evidence

Partnerships may wish to make use of the following permissions to make the assessment process more manageable:

• Flexible formats: Partnerships may use any format or technology, such as online platforms, interactive dashboards, videos, infographics or traditional written reports, as long as outputs are accessible, transparent and easy for the public to understand. Where interactive dashboards or live data tools are used, partnerships should ensure that interpretation rather than volume of data remains central. Dashboards should support transparency and understanding, not replace analytical judgement or narrative explanation.
• Gaps are acceptable: Where data is limited, unclear or evolving, you may simply note this rather than attempt to fill every gap.
• Shared evidence products: You may choose to develop regional data catalogues, thematic profiles or shared dashboards to support both PSB and RPB assessments.

Identifying and collecting data and evidence for your assessment

A clear understanding of what the assessment is intended to achieve will help focus your evidence‑gathering on the issues that matter most for your area. Being explicit about your purpose from the outset helps shape the structure of the assessment, identifies where deeper exploration is needed, and provides a clear line of sight to the priorities that will follow in your Well‑being assessments or Population Needs Plans.

Much of the data you need is likely to already exist. A key early task is to identify relevant sources and understand what each can contribute. Useful sources may include:

• Official statistics: such as data produced by ONS, Welsh Government or Public Health Wales. These provide robust, comparable data over time and across areas, though often with limited granularity at community level.
• Administrative data: information collected through service delivery. This can offer insight into real‑time service use and demand but may vary in quality or completeness.
• Local and community intelligence: insight generated through consultations, partner reports or local engagement, which can reveal issues not visible in national datasets.
• Grey literature: evaluations, research summaries and stakeholder reports that provide contextual or thematic insight. These may vary in quality and should be interpreted with care.
• Qualitative insight and community evidence: such as interviews, workshops or co‑production activities, which provide depth and explanation but may not represent all groups equally.
• Environmental evidence sources: including the State of Natural Resources Report (SoNaRR) and Natural Resources Wales’s Area Statements, which provide regional insight into environmental risks, pressures and opportunities.

No single source provides a complete picture. Using multiple types of evidence together can help corroborate findings, highlight contradictions and build a more rounded understanding of well‑being and need.

In considering the above forms of evidence partnerships should begin by considering recognised and trusted sources of evidence, including official statistics, national indicator frameworks, administrative datasets and established research. Use of these sources promotes comparability, consistency and confidence in findings across Wales. Other sources can then be used to gather additional information and data that can complement this data through more localised insight.

In considering the use of existing data, including qualitative insights from citizens collected through existing or ongoing engagement channels, partnerships should critically consider the robustness and representativeness of the evidence and its implications for findings. In particular you should consider whether:

• a range of demographic groups are represented
• geographic variation across the region is reflected
• evidence covers the key themes likely to influence well‑being and/or care and support needs
• perspectives from people with lived experience have been meaningfully included

Collecting new data

Where evidence gaps are identified, partnerships may wish to undertake targeted, proportionate data collection to strengthen the assessment. The expectation is not for extensive new activity to address every evidence gap, but for a balanced evidence base that credibly informs your findings.

Identifying gaps early allows partnerships to plan their approach and make best use of available resources. A simple data‑mapping exercise can help clarify what information already exists, where the gaps lie and which gaps are most important to address.

Capacity for primary data collection varies across Wales. Some areas may have sufficient in‑house analytical capacity, while others may need to draw on external researchers or academic partners. Decisions about how to collect new evidence should take account of local skills, resources and the relative importance of your evidence need.

Where new data collection is needed, partnerships should consider who to involve, what methods are appropriate and whether steps are required to ensure that seldom‑heard groups are meaningfully included. Where possible, integrating additional data collection into existing planned engagement activities rather than creating entirely new exercises may be appropriate.

Analysing and interpreting your data

Once you have gathered your data and evidence the next step is to analyse and interpret what they collectively show about people’s needs, the factors shaping them, and the implications for the future. The aim of this stage is to explain what the evidence means and why it matters, not to present all analysis in full or reproduce every dataset. Your assessment should outline the approach to analysis and how your conclusions were reached, guided by the core questions set at the outset of the assessment. These should guide your interpretation and help identify the most important messages.

As part of this interpretation, partnerships may find it helpful to reflect on their boundary judgements – the choices made about what has been included in the analysis, what has been left out, and why. Being explicit about these boundaries helps avoid blind spots. Partnerships may wish to ask:

1. Which groups, places, data sources or themes have we included – and what sits outside the boundary?
2. Are any important perspectives, experiences or influencing factors missing from our evidence?
3. If we widened or narrowed the boundary slightly, would the issue look different?
4. How might our boundary choices affect our understanding of inequalities or local variation?

Situation analysis and response analysis

Your analysis will likely include both:

• Situation analysis – understanding the economic, social, environmental and cultural conditions in your area, or the needs of specific population groups.
• Response analysis – considering what the evidence suggests about which issues should be prioritised, the types of interventions that may help, and what is known about what is or is not working.

Identifying patterns, inequalities and trends

Analysis should examine the main patterns and trends in your area, how they differ between groups or places, and how they compare with other areas or national benchmarks. This includes identifying inequalities, considering whether they are widening or narrowing, and reflecting on how conditions have changed since the last assessment.

Applying systems thinking to interpretation

When analysing evidence, partnerships may wish to consider how issues are interconnected, how actions or pressures in one part of the system affect others, and how shared drivers influence both PSB and RPB responsibilities. Taking a systems thinking approach can help identify underlying dynamics that may not be visible when looking at individual data sources. Partnerships may find it useful to ask:

• What is causing or reinforcing the pattern we are seeing?
• Are services, behaviours, environments or policies interacting in unexpected ways?
• What unintended consequences might arise from current pressures or decisions?
• Where might preventative action have the greatest impact? 

This approach supports more holistic and preventative interpretation and helps avoid narrow or linear assumptions.

Understanding drivers and causes

Interpretation should go beyond describing patterns to explore the underlying drivers and possible causes. These may reflect local service changes, wider policy developments, demographic shifts or external events. Understanding why trends are occurring can help inform the type of action that may be required and where early, preventative intervention could have the most impact.

Drawing on multiple sources

Using multiple sources together allows partnerships to strengthen their analysis. Evidence sources may corroborate one another, highlight contradictions or reveal different perspectives. Where sources diverge - for example between public perception and administrative data - exploring the reasons for these differences can offer valuable insight.

Linking evidence to conclusions

Partnerships should be able to demonstrate how evidence has informed key findings, conclusions and priorities. Analysis should clearly distinguish between evidence, interpretation and judgement. Where professional judgement or stakeholder views influence conclusions, this should be made explicit alongside the supporting evidence.

Being transparent about assumptions and limitations

It is normal for evidence gaps, uncertainties and limitations to remain. Acknowledging these clearly strengthens your analysis and helps guide areas for future work. It is also good practice to be transparent about any assumptions made during the analysis, and why these assumptions were necessary. This supports understanding of the findings and builds confidence in the interpretation.

What needs to be included (minimum narrative elements)

In addition to these points about the approach to analysis and evidence, partnerships should be mindful of the end product of their assessments. Each assessment should include a concise narrative that covers:

• What the evidence shows: headline findings from data, research and lived experience, including clear references to the principal evidence sources used
• What the assessment does and does not cover: a brief explanation of any key limitations, uncertainties or boundaries in the evidence, including where conclusions should be treated with caution.
• Why this matters: the implications for well-being or for care and support needs
• What is changing: key trends, pressures and strengths emerging across the region
• Why this is a priority for Well-being and Area Plans: why this is a priority for action.
• Where the partnership adds value: issues where collective action is necessary, and individual organisations cannot deliver change alone

This narrative should directly inform the identification of a smaller number of priorities, reflecting your intention for assessments to be more selective and strategic.

Community‑area analysis within the (Wellbeing) Assessment

For PSBs, the Well‑being of Future Generations Act requires assessments to “set out the communities that comprise the area” and to analyse the state of well‑being in each community and the whole area. Partnerships have flexibility in how this is presented. It is not a requirement to produce standalone chapters or annexes for every community area, unless this is locally preferred.

Community‑area analysis may be integrated within the main narrative, provided that the assessment clearly highlights where well‑being differs between communities and identifies any notable inequalities, variations or distinct local patterns. Where a standalone annex or supplementary material is more practical, this is also acceptable. What matters is that the assessment demonstrates a clear understanding of community‑level variation and reflects this insight in the overall analysis.

Futures and scenario planning

To support better decision‑making, partnerships may wish to include a brief, proportionate look ahead. This does not require complex modelling. Instead, simple and practical approaches can be used, such as:

• “What if” discussions with partners
• Short scenario sketches (e.g., optimistic, baseline, challenging)
• Trend lines drawn from national indicators, demographic forecasts or local intelligence
• Considering what changes are most likely to shape the next 5-10 years

The purpose is not to predict the future, but to help partnerships consider how priorities may evolve and where collective action will be most needed. This futures insight will support the prioritisation process described in Section 5.

This annex is intended to support partnerships by signposting recognised national, regional and thematic data sources. As data products, dashboards and evidence resources continue to evolve, this annex will be treated as a live resource and reviewed periodically. Welsh Government will continue to work with partners, including Data Cymru and other national data providers, to support access to recognised and quality-assured data sources and promote greater consistency in the evidence used across Wales. Partnerships should ensure they are using the most up-to-date datasets and analytical resources available at the time assessments are undertaken.

Below is a list of data sources and lead contacts to support development of strategic needs assessments.  The list is not exhaustive and Public Service Boards and Regional Partnership Boards will be expected to source local, regional and national data to determine need for their localities and regions. The links below signpost to established data sources to support boards and to maximize capacity, and partnerships should start by considering the recognised national sources listed below before developing local indicators or alternative measures. There is no expectation that this data is presented in local and regional assessments. The interpretation of data will be more important than simply displaying the data in assessment reports and hyperlinks can be included.

Data sources/contacts

• Wellbeing of Wales: 2025 - The report considers progress against the 50 national indicators, which were set by Welsh Ministers in 2016, alongside a range of other relevant data.
• Primary Care Clusters Dashboard - Population and public health outcomes data at Wales, HB and PCC level.
• Primary Care Clusters summary - Tabular summary of key metrics.
• Public Health Outcomes Framework reporting tool - Approximately 50 public health indicators covering risk factors, wider determinants of health and health outcomes throughout the life course. Current and trend data at Wales, HB and LA level along with breakdowns such as age, sex and area deprivation.
• Secondary School Children's Health and Well-being Dashboard - Data from 2017-2023 (biennial) covering a wide range of topics relating to the health and wellbeing of 11-16 children. Powerful data using the School Health Research Network survey. Most recent survey included approx. 120,000 children. Data at Wales, HB and LA level.
• Cancer reporting tool Wales - Official stats on cancer incidence, survival and deaths. Breakdowns by HB, LA and area deprivation.
• Child Measurement Programme Dashboard - Official stats on measures of overweight and obesity among 4-5 year olds. Breakdowns by HB, LA, Primary Care Cluster, ethnicity and area deprivation.
• National Social Care Data Portal For Wales - National Social Services Data
• Dashboards - Data Cymru - Data Cymru dashboards
• Natural Resources Wales / SoNaRR 2025 SMNR and biodiversity assessments - State of Natural Resources Report 2025 (SoNaRR) / NRW Area Statement
• ArmedForces@gov.wales / Peter.Kellam@gov.wales - Armed Forces Community needs (Welsh Government)
• NHSPI.NationalPEoLCProgramme@wales.nhs.uk - National Palliative and End of Life Care Programme (NHS Wales Performance and Improvement)
• Office for National Statistics - The Office for National Statistics publish a range of data relating to assessments including data relating to population, demography and economic activity.
• StatsWales - Data and statistics for Wales on a range of topics.
• Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation: 2025 - Comparing relative deprivation across areas.
• National Survey for Wales - Data from the national survey for Wales which covers a range of topics, with respondents across Wales.

This glossary provides definitions of key terms used throughout this guidance and accompanying annexes. It is intended to support a shared and consistent understanding across Public Services Boards (PSBs), Regional Partnership Boards (RPBs) and their partners.

Definitions are provided for clarity and usability within this guidance and do not replace statutory definitions where these exist.

A

Assessment (general)

A structured process of gathering, analysing and interpreting evidence to understand well-being or need.

Assessment of local well-being (PSB assessment)

The statutory assessment prepared by a Public Services Board under the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, analysing economic, social, environmental and cultural well-being across an area and its communities.

Area Plan (RPB)

The statutory plan produced by Regional Partnership Boards which sets out how care and support needs will be met, informed by the Population Needs Assessment.

C

Combined assessment

A single integrated document that fulfils both the PSB well-being assessment and RPB Population Needs Assessment requirements, where partnerships choose to adopt this approach.

Communities (community areas)

Geographic areas within a PSB area used to analyse local variation in well-being. These should reflect meaningful local identity and variation rather than solely administrative boundaries.

Consultation

The formal process by which partnerships seek views on draft assessments or plans from specified persons and organisations, allowing sufficient time for informed feedback.

Co-production

An approach to working with people and communities as equal partners in shaping evidence, analysis or services.

D

Data catalogue

A structured list of datasets, research and evidence sources used in an assessment. This may be published as an annex or maintained as a separate resource.

Dashboards (data dashboards)

Interactive or digital tools used to present and explore data visually, which may support but do not need to be embedded within the assessment.

E

Evidence

Information used to inform an assessment, including quantitative data, qualitative insight, research, administrative data and lived experience.

Engagement

A broader process of involving people, communities and stakeholders in shaping evidence and understanding needs or well-being.

Environmental well-being

The condition of the natural environment, including the resilience of ecosystems, natural resources and their contribution to well-being.

F

Future Trends Report

A national report published by Welsh Ministers which provides analysis of long-term trends affecting well-being in Wales.

Futures and scenario planning

Techniques used to consider how conditions or needs may change over time, supporting long-term thinking and prioritisation.

G

Grey literature

Non-formally published material such as evaluations, internal reports, briefing papers and research summaries, which may provide useful contextual evidence.

I

Inequalities

Differences in outcomes between groups or places, often reflecting uneven distribution of resources, opportunities or conditions.

Integration (ways of working)

Considering how different objectives, policies or organisations interact and affect one another.

L

Lived experience

Knowledge and insight gained through direct personal experience, often used to complement quantitative data.

N

National indicators

Measures published by Welsh Ministers used to track progress towards the national well-being goals.

P

Population Needs Assessment (PNA)

The statutory assessment undertaken by RPBs under the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014, focusing on care and support needs, carers’ needs and service provision.

Prevention

Taking action to prevent problems occurring or getting worse, rather than responding after they arise.

Priorities (in this guidance)

A small number of key issues identified through the assessment that require partnership attention. These are not statutory objectives but inform later planning stages.

Proportionate (approach)

An approach that is appropriate to the scale, significance and purpose of the work, avoiding unnecessary complexity, burden or duplication.

Public Services Board (PSB)

The statutory partnership established in each local authority area responsible for improving well-being through joint working.

R

Regional Partnership Board (RPB)

A statutory partnership responsible for assessing and planning services to meet care and support needs across a region.

Response analysis

Analysis which considers what the evidence suggests should be done, including identifying priorities, interventions or actions.

S

Shared evidence base

A collaboratively developed set of data, insight and analysis that can be used by both PSBs and RPBs to inform their assessments.

Situation analysis

Analysis describing the current state of well-being or need, including patterns, trends and inequalities.

Statutory guidance

Guidance issued under legislation which must be taken into account when exercising statutory functions.

Sustainable development principle

The requirement to act in a way that meets present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

W

Well-being

The economic, social, environmental and cultural conditions of an area and its people, considered together.

Well-being goals

The 7 national goals which describe the kind of Wales the Well-being of Future Generations Act seeks to achieve.

Well-being Plan (local well-being plan)

The statutory plan produced by a PSB, setting out local objectives and steps to improve well-being based on the assessment.

Key cross-system clarifications

Care and support (in this guidance)

Refers to consideration of the well-being of people who need care and support, and carers, at a population level within assessments. This does not extend to detailed service planning, which is the responsibility of RPBs.

Alignment (PSB and RPB work)

The coordination of evidence, engagement, analysis or processes between PSBs and RPBs to improve efficiency and coherence, while maintaining distinct statutory responsibilities.

Duplication (to be avoided)

Unnecessary repetition of data collection, analysis or engagement across partnerships. This guidance encourages shared approaches to reduce duplication.

Reference (data and evidence)

Citing or signposting evidence sources rather than reproducing full datasets or analysis within the assessment.