Review of the Single Advice Fund: summary

The Single Advice Fund (SAF) is a grant funding programme, delivered from January 2020. It funds the delivery of free to the client social welfare information and advice services, including the topics benefits, debt, housing, employment and discrimination.

The funding was set up so that the provision of face-to-face advice services were to be planned, coordinated and delivered within six regions. Within each region, funding was available for a community focused/generalist service and a specialist service. In addition to these, funding was available for the provision of a pan-Wales remote advice service. Citizens Advice Cymru were awarded the grant funding as the lead provider.

The Social Welfare Advice and DWP Policy Branch (Welsh Government) commissioned the Internal Research Programme (Knowledge and Analytical Services, Welsh Government) to undertake a review of the SAF. The aim of the review is to understand the implementation of the SAF and provide an overview of how it has performed against its aims.

The research methods used

• Analysis of monitoring data from the community focused/generalist and specialist advice services, both regional and pan-Wales, delivered by Citizens Advice through the SAF.
• Interviews with service providers from Citizens Advice within the SAF.

Interviews with clients who had accessed services funded by the SAF were also planned. However, these were not possible to conduct due to low take up by clients.

This section is organised by each of the SAF aims. Where years are discussed, these refer to financial years (April to March).

Did the SAF help meet the ongoing increase in demand for access to advice services?

Level of demand for services

Although the total number of unique clients accessing services through the SAF decreased overall between 2020/21 to 2023/24, overall the monitoring data suggests that there has been consistent demand for SAF funded advice services. The number of unique clients peaked at 68,271 in 2021/22, decreasing in both 2022/23 and 2023/24, to 58,411 unique clients accessing the services in 2023/24.

Findings from interviews with service providers also highlighted that there has been a year-on-year increase in demand providers would not have been able to meet without the SAF. Comments also included the rise in demand in the context of factors such as coronavirus (COVID-19) and the rise in the cost-of-living.

Ability for the SAF to meet demand

There is mixed evidence regarding the ability of the SAF to meet demand.

In interviews with service providers, some noted that the central design of the SAF, and the remote pan-Wales provision, helped to increase capacity to meet demand. This provides wider reach and improved access for clients. However, this remote provision also in-turn increased the demand for advice.

Some service providers felt the funding (duration and amount) was inadequate to meet demand, considering the context of the general increase in demand due to wider factors (COVID-19, cost of living) and the staff numbers and staff retention required to meet demand. Service providers also raised concerns about waiting times when demand was higher than capacity.

Moreover, monitoring data show that while the ‘Remote telephone service’ appears to have been able to meet demand, other services such as the ‘Employment and discrimination telephone service’ may not have.

Did the SAF help to ensure more people throughout Wales have access to the information and advice that they need?

Reaching people throughout Wales

Findings within this review are generally positive when considering whether the service reached people throughout Wales. However, there were some key elements of the service that could be improved to ensure the service is reaching people throughout Wales. This was mainly surrounding gaps in service provision for certain groups.

Services should enable widespread access while prioritising those most in need (SAF guidance notes, 2019). The monitoring data show that the service does appear to be reaching most priority groups. However, those aged under 25 reflect the lowest proportion of clients accessing services in each year, which could suggest that either demand is genuinely lower in this age group, or the services are not reaching those under 25.

Findings from interviews with service providers suggest the structure of the SAF, including integration within a pan-Wales model, meant there was more consistency across Wales in advice service delivery and there were less chances people’s needs would go unmet. Service providers also noted using new locations to engage members of the public which they may not have normally reached.

However, gaps in provision were also raised in terms of advice relating to immigration and veterans, or supporting those with high levels of vulnerability, such as due to mental health issues.

Accessing information and advice

Findings within this review are generally positive when considering whether people were accessing information and advice that they need. However, there were some elements of the service that could be improved. These were mainly surrounding the increased focus on remote methods and the possibility that it may not always match the needs of clients.

Monitoring data suggest support through the SAF was tailored to individual needs and overall easy to access. Clients were able to access the service through a variety of contact channels, which varied depending on client characteristics and region. Clients were also supported in different languages.

Client experience monitoring data show the majority of respondents reported finding it ‘Very easy’ or ‘Easy’ to access the service, with the proportion who reported it was ‘Very easy’ or ‘Easy’ to access the service ranging from 85.17% in 2020/21 to 74.91% in 2022/23. In interviews with service providers, some suggested that the remote service provided a wider reach and variety of services that the public could access.

However, monitoring data show there are some who did not find the service easy to access, particularly in 2022/23 for example, where 11.27% reported it was ‘Difficult’ or ‘Very Difficult’ to access the service. Additionally, in interviews with service providers, some suggested that the remote service placed barriers in terms of how support was offered. Remote provision does not always match the needs of clients, and they may miss out on support. As such they felt more resources should be given to face to face, video call and webchat support.

The information and advice need

Findings within this review are generally positive when considering whether people are accessing the information and advice they need, particularly in terms of provision of multi-faceted advice on a broad range of issues. However, there were some elements that could be improved, mainly surrounding the extent to which clients feel their problems are resolved.

Monitoring data show that on average clients have more than one issue (topic or problem to discuss), and the overall average number of issues per client increased from 4.3 in 2020/21 to 5.2 in 2023/24. The data also show that there is variation in the topic or issue advice is sought for depending on region and client characteristics, highlighting the importance of being able to offer wide-ranging, tailored support to ensure the unique profile of topics or problems that a client wants to discuss is fully met. Findings from interviews with service providers suggest overall there was provision of multi-faceted and personalised support. Providers noted that through the SAF infrastructure support was more holistic, with smoother client journeys. They reported increased issue coverage and the ability to deal with multiple issues more seamlessly.

Client experience data does suggest that at least in part the SAF is helping clients access the information and advice that they need. Over 80% of respondents in each year reported they would not have been able to sort out their problem without the support of Citizens Advice. Moreover, the majority of respondents indicated that the service did help them find a way forward (‘Completely’ or to a ‘Great Extent’), suggesting the service was useful in relation to their problem. However, the proportion of respondents who reported the service ‘Completely’ helped them to find a way forward decreased over time, from 50.61% in 2020/21 to 40.47% 2023/24. Moreover, a sizable proportion of respondents were unsure or did not feel their problem was resolved. For those not feeling their problem was resolved this was especially in recent years when combined, around a quarter of respondents selected their problem was either ‘Not at all’ or ‘Slightly’ resolved in 2022/23 and 2023/24.

Did the SAF effectively promote early access amongst the most vulnerable households?

Data are limited and therefore firm conclusions cannot be drawn as to whether the SAF did or did not effectively promote early access amongst the most vulnerable households.

Client experience monitoring data suggest most clients sought advice in advance of a crisis (‘Take Action’). 'Take action’ was the most common response option chosen in each year at around half of respondents. There is little variation when analysing responses by disability status or ethnicity. This suggests that within these priority groups, clients are still accessing support before the issue falls into the ‘Urgent’ category.

Although most appear to have accessed support at an early stage, across years there was a consistent proportion of respondents who reported they sought advice at the point where they were in crisis (‘Urgent’), at 22.82% in 2020/21 to 25.46% in 2023/24.

Did the SAF ensure that people accessing advice are given the opportunity to develop their resilience to future welfare problems?

Evidence is limited and therefore firm conclusions cannot be drawn as to whether the SAF did or did not ensure that people accessing advice are given the opportunity to develop their resilience to future welfare problems.

There were instances during the interviews with service providers where they felt that the approach to advice provision allowed for clients to build their abilities to deal with future problems. No monitoring data were collected regarding this aim. The research plan was to capture the views of clients who had accessed SAF funded services through interviews, however client interviews were not completed due to recruitment barriers.

Did the SAF enhance access to services that can deliver the type of specialist advice that people need to resolve complex and often entrenched problems?

In general, it appears the SAF has supported the provision of specialist advice services needed to resolve complex problems. However, there were elements of the service, highlighted by providers, that should be considered to help ensure that the service can continue to support people to resolve complex and entrenched problems.

Monitoring data do show that the SAF funded specialist service was accessed consistently over time, at 14,032 unique clients in 2020/21 and 16,481 unique clients in 2023/24. The need for this service appears to be greater for disabled clients and those with a long-term health condition. The intention was the remote specialist service complemented the regional services, ensuring people were offered access to face-to-face advice where needed. The data do suggest that clients in the specialist service have been able to access services via. multiple contact channels, and more commonly use email or letter contact channels compared to the generalist service.

Regarding complexity of problems, the monitoring data show that across all years, the average number of issues per client was higher in the specialist service (6.8 to 7.3) compared to the generalist service (3.2 to 4.1). There was regional variation in the specific type of issue clients sought advice for in the specialist service. The specialist service is specifically for benefits, debt, discrimination (including education), employment, and housing advice. Despite being target areas, the proportion of clients that had an education issue or a housing issue was low across all regional specialist services. In parallel, although representing a small proportion of clients, there were clients in the specialist service across regions who had issues on topics outside the target areas. Clients should continue to be able to access advice on multiple issues in one place.

 In addition, regarding workload, data show in all years on average a greater number of activities and contacts were required to support clients in the specialist services compared to the generalist services.

In interviews with service providers, some noted the role of the SAF in supporting clients to access specialist services through helping to provide the capacity, with both local and national access. In some instances, service providers highlighted that while the SAF had created more specialist resources, the services were not enough, or they could not fund all areas of specialist services they needed. Moreover, the SAF did not provide for the time and resources needed to develop partnerships with niche or specialist providers. There were also concerns regarding loss of specialist skills in the provider workforce due to a focus on referrals.

Did the SAF improve service efficiency and collaboration between advice service providers?

Service efficiency

The consensus from interviews with service providers was that the SAF had improved service efficiency in their organisations. Efficiencies noted by providers were:

• the ability to provide remote or in-person advice depending on needs
• the centralised resources and systems as a result of the pan-Wales model
• the move away from signposting to another organisation to warmer referrals or handovers

However, there were ways in which providers felt the element of the SAF which has pushed to telephone advice had reduced efficiencies. Further resources were reported as needed for in person, video call and webchat advice not only to support those who are uncomfortable with telephone but also to meet demand and reduce wait times. Some also noted reduced efficiency when dealing with local level issues, where the remote service created extra steps, and so delays, in the issuing of food or fuel vouchers.

Collaboration between advice service providers

In interviews with service providers the overall sentiment was that the SAF has helped to improve collaboration and joint working among advice providers. This included the design of the SAF which focused attention on working across agencies, and the SAF providing the opportunity and resources to collaborate. Some respondents noted improved collaboration through a better understanding of what services other providers offer. Efficiencies such as the centralised resources and system and warmer referrals also helped to improve collaboration. This aligns with the monitoring data that shows the service has supported referrals of clients between multiple organisations, where most organisations both sent and received referrals.

However, monitoring data show there are those who were signed up to the platform who never sent or received a referral – perhaps suggesting the intention to collaborate which did not come to fruition. Additionally, interviews with service providers highlight instances where a paid specialist partner did not collaborate effectively, only receiving referrals and not providing feedback. Providers also raised difficulties partnering with smaller organisations as the SAF model lends more to larger partners.

Service provision

Recommendation 1

Further investigation should be undertaken in to the ‘Employment and Discrimination telephone service’ to understand any issues with service delivery. This could allow for further insight and the possibility of implementing changes to improve specialist services for clients.

Recommendation 2

Further work is undertaken with service providers to understand potential gaps in provision (such as advice relating to immigration or veterans and supporting highly vulnerable clients) and how these gaps could be filled, to ensure that a) the SAF is able to meet demand and b) people are able to access advice and services that they need.

Recommendation 3

Further investigation is undertaken to understand what issues and for whom fall into the ‘urgent’ category to understand if more preventative measures could be put in place to support these clients to access services at an earlier stage.

Recommendation 4

A review of the definitions and measures used within the SAF for protected characteristics is undertaken, so that they are in line with harmonised standards and Welsh policy need.

Recommendation 5

The remote provision is reviewed to ensure that:

• it is meeting the needs of clients and ensuring that clients can access services in a channel of their choice in which they feel most comfortable (such as those who would prefer face to face, video call or webchat, or who are highly vulnerable, are not missing out)
• it is not putting barriers in place for processes in which alternative channels may be more appropriate (such as the example given regarding issuing food or fuel vouchers)

Recommendation 6

A process is put in place to ensure that partners who provide advice are collaborating as required to ensure the advice service is integrated across providers of advice and so is seamless for the client. 

Recommendation 7

Further investigation should be undertaken with organisations who are not sending or receiving referrals despite signing up to do so, to understand why this is and be able to support the organisation with this process if needed.

Recommendation 8

Provisions are made to ensure staff are developing the necessary specialist skills and knowledge, and that this is consistent across regions.

Funding

Recommendation 9

The funding provision for specialist services is reviewed so:

• it is suitable for enabling access to specialist advice on a broad range of issues
• it is suitable for fostering relationships with niche services
• levels of staffing are appropriate
• funding provision is made for smaller organisations who have trusted links with specific groups in the community

Recommendation 10

The level of funding for SAF services should be reviewed to ensure that it allows for sufficient and consistent delivery of services in light of general levels of demand, some issues with waiting times, the staffing numbers and longer-term retention required to meet the demand, and the resource needed to support highly vulnerable clients.

Future monitoring and evaluation

Recommendation 11

From the outset, data sharing agreements between the commissioned service and Welsh Government are set up to ensure secure data sharing between the two organisations. This would allow for more timely and robust evaluation processes.

Recommendation 12

The review and/or collection of certain data metrics (outlined in the full report) should be considered in order to gain a deeper understanding of SAF provision and services.

Recommendation 13

An analyst should be involved in the monitoring data set up process of any further commissioned service to ensure that any future data collection is proportionate, appropriate and of suitable quality.

Recommendation 14

Certain elements of the research methodology and further areas for research opportunities uncovered from the findings (outlined in the full report) should be considered if future iterations of the SAF were to be evaluated.

Report author: Cox, R., Endicott, A., Findlay, S., Parry, J., Pryor, M., & Smith., L

Views expressed in this report are those of the researchers and not necessarily those of the Welsh Government.

For further information please contact:
Internal Research Programme
Social Research and Information Division
Welsh Government
Cathays Park
Cardiff
CF10 3NQ

Email: RhYF.IRP@gov.wales

Social research number: 40/2025
Digital ISBN: 978-1-83715-646-7