Social Security Charter Review: research findings

18. Workshop 5: Consolidation of findings

The final phase of the research took place between September and December. The focus in this phase was producing a final draft of changes to the Charter, revising the framework, and writing a report describing the research process.

Before workshop five, changes to the draft revised Charter were made based on feedback from the core client group at workshop four. Some changes had also been made based on the findings from the interviews with clients from seldom heard groups, as described in section 17 above. Comments from the Research Advisory Group were also taken into consideration, including adding a commitment to set out how the Scottish Government and Social Security Scotland work with SCoSS. This reflected the role of SCoSS in providing scrutiny of the social security system and aligned with clients’ strong interest in accountability and performance.

Also taken into account was feedback from the group of staff who had given ongoing input to address questions raised by participants and give advice on processes and terminology. Staff from Social Security Scotland’s communications team also provided input about language and tone. Edits were made to align the terms used in the Charter with Social Security Scotland’s style and to make sure commitments and headings were clear and as easy to read as possible.

The final workshop with the core group took place at the start of October and 14 participants took part. The main purpose of this workshop was to reach agreement on a final draft of revisions to the Charter. The group received a presentation from Social Security Scotland about the role of the Charter in delivering their service. The sections below describe the discussions at the final workshop.

18.1 Structure and content of the Charter

In their smaller groups, participants discussed the changes that had been made since the previous workshop. The participants also discussed their thoughts overall, including on the final structure and whether the revised Charter reflected their priorities.

Overall, there was support for the changes that had been made since workshop four. There was broad agreement that the draft now represented the group’s final recommended revisions. Participants were content that changes reflected their priorities and feedback to date.

“It’ll be a much improved document.” Core client group participant

“A better version of what it was.” Core client group participant

There was positive feedback about some changes as well as some suggestions for further revisions. These are described below with draft commitments presented in boxes for context.

In section one, participants liked the change in language from ‘staff’ to ‘colleagues’. They thought ‘colleagues’ was a positive word which suggests “inclusivity”.

Draft commitment 1.6: Help you understand what you’re entitled to and support you if you make an application

Participants thought this commitment could be made clearer to let clients know what practical support is available.

Draft commitment 1.12: Providing information in different formats and languages and communicating with you in ways that meet your needs as much as we can. For example, by providing interpreters

There was general agreement with the changes to this commitment. One participant said it “could not be bettered” and another said it made sense to include given the diversity of people in Scotland.

Draft commitment 1.15: If you want someone, or an organisation, to support you with your application or contact with us, with your permission we’ll make this as straightforward as possible

One participant highlighted this commitment as an example of “helpful rewording” since workshop four. Another said this commitment now provided “reassurance” about the support available to clients.

Draft commitment 1.14: Refer you to a free and independent advocacy service. If you have a disability, this service can help you understand and be involved in decisions which affect you. You can also ask someone that you know to support you

Participants reiterated that it was unclear why advocacy was for clients who have a disability and not all clients who need support. One participant suggested that “vulnerability” replace the mention of ‘disability’.

Draft please help us by statement: Telling us how we can make it easier for you to use our service. For example, if you have communication or cultural needs – we’ll do our best to meet them

One group of participants highlighted the phrase ‘we’ll do our best’ as an example of the vague language which they wanted the Charter to avoid. Participants did recognise however, that there would be limitations to how Social Security Scotland were able to meet clients’ needs for example, in delivering in-person services in remote areas.

Participants also gave feedback about sections two and three. One group were not keen on a change of language in section two to ‘along the way’. They felt this was too simplistic.

Draft commitment: Only carrying out a consultation for disability benefits when we’re not able to decide based on the information that is already available or if you request one

There was positive feedback about “helpful rewording” to this commitment to include the option for clients to request a consultation if they wish to have one.

Draft commitment: Working with the Scottish Commission on Social Security who provide independent scrutiny of the Scottish social security system

Participants were content with the added commitment about SCoSS and thought it was “good to add in”.

Draft commitment: Continue to pay you at the same level if you challenge a decision to reduce or stop certain benefits. This is called “Short-term Assistance” and you do not need to pay this back

Participants said it was important for clients to have further information about Short Term Assistance and suggested it could be included in the ‘Useful information’ section.

Draft commitment: Providing information to help answer any questions you may have along the way and responding to enquiries as quickly as we can

Some participants continued to say the phrasing ‘as quickly as we can’ was vague and suggested this commitment could be refocussed on providing clients with updates.

There was, again, positive feedback about section four commitments. On reflection, one group considered if section four should be moved to the beginning of the Charter as it “sets into place the whole feeling of it and how it will be delivered”.

Draft commitment: Putting people first as we deliver an efficient service and deliver value for money for the people of Scotland

Following detailed discussions at previous workshops, participants liked the addition of ‘for the people of Scotland’ to this commitment. Participants thought it was now clearer, and reflected that social security was for “not just those sick or need it, but everyone”.

Draft commitment: Promoting a positive view of social security as a human right and a public service to be proud of

Draft commitment: Publicly challenging myths about social security and stereotypes about the people who use it, focussing on using more positive words to describe both

Participants thought the changes to these commitments were positive and again highlighted that they provided a clear signal that social security was “here to help you not judge you”.

Draft commitment: Making sure as many people as possible get what they are entitled to by delivering on the principles set out in the Benefit Take-up Strategy

Draft commitment: Reaching people who are most likely to be excluded including by providing information about social security in community locations

Participants agreed with the revisions to these commitments and supported the aim to improve awareness and take-up. Participants said more information on the Take-up Strategy should be provided in the ‘Useful information’ section.

18.2 Additional information for clients

Overall, there continued to be support for additional ‘useful information’ relevant to the Charter but this was more modest than in previous discussions. Overall, there appeared to be support for a glossary of terms and helpful links. Participants were less sure about visual ‘maps’ or flowcharts. It may have been harder for participants to engage with these ideas without examples of what they look like and what information they could contain. One participant said that the new content in section two of the Charter meant it was less necessary to include visual explanations of the application process. One participant said that some of the suggested information would be common across the Scottish Government, so it could be helpful to link to the gov.scot website.

Participants raised concerns about how this information was communicated to clients and the potential impact on the Charter document. A key concern was about length. Participants said it was important to make sure the Charter wasn’t too long or complicated. Although some participants suggested the ‘useful information’ came at the end of the Charter, some were concerned this would make the document overly long. One participant stressed that the “Charter is about rights” and “it’s not a document that should explain everything”. Another participant also said “you don’t want to overload people”. There were a couple of suggestions for additional information to be provided in a standalone document to accompany the Charter to avoid making the Charter itself longer.

Participants were generally supportive of providing links to online information. Several discussed hyperlinks as a way to highlight specific terms or phrases and link to further information. Participants said hyperlinks would keep the content of the Charter concise while still offering the option for more information for clients who wish to read more. One participant suggested a QR code that directed to information online. Participants were unsure about how this information could be provided to clients who can’t access information online. They raised questions about how the additional information could be included in paper copies of the Charter. Participants recognised it was challenging to adopt just one method of providing the information given the range of different communication needs among clients. There was also a concern that additional information should be current and up-to-date. Participants weren’t sure how this could be maintained if information was printed on paper copies.

18.3 Final reflections on the Charter Measurement Framework

Some smaller groups had time to discuss final reflections on the Charter Measurement Framework. Participants said it was important that information about performance was accurate and up-to-date. Participants again said it should focus on “broad brush performance” with data about key timescales for clients. For example, phone wait times and time taken to process applications. Lastly, participants said it should be transparent about known issues and include “feedback from people to show what’s been done to fix things”.

18.4 Feedback from the core client group

At the end of the final session, the research team thanked the core client group for their diligent participation in the workshops. Participants who had attended at least one workshop were invited to take part in a short survey, anonymously if they wished, to provide feedback about their experiences of the research. Eight participants provided feedback.

Participants were asked to say how much they agreed or disagreed with a series of statements about the workshops. All participants who completed the survey agreed or strongly agreed the sign-up process to take part in the workshops was clear and straightforward. All also agreed the information provided during the presentations was easy to understand.

All were happy with the structure for the workshops, including timings on workshop days and breaks. All agreed the facilitators had made them feel at ease and they had been treated with dignity, fairness and respect. All agreed the rules for the small group discussions had been clearly explained, agreed upon and followed in their groups. One participant said they neither agreed nor disagreed they had the opportunity to raise issues or concerns regarding the Charter that were important to them.

Thinking about the workshops as part of the overall Charter review process, all agreed they understood how their input would be used. All also agreed that taking part in the workshops allowed them to make a meaningful contribution to the Charter Review process. Based on their experience of taking part in the workshops, all said they were very likely to take part in future Client Panels research.

Participants also left comments to say what was good about their experience of taking part in the workshops. Participants said they had felt listened to and appreciated the opportunity to be involved and have their input taken into consideration.

“A feeling of being listened to and that my opinion was important and valued.” Core client group participant

“It felt like my views were being taken seriously and would be used in the Charter review process itself.” Core client group participant

“Being able to be part of something that will make a difference.” Core client group participant

There was also positive feedback about the researchers and staff involved in the workshops. Two participants said all members of the group had been supported to get involved and share their views.

“The researchers were all very cordial and friendly and the other people taking part had some great points. It seemed to me like people were being listened to and understood.” Core client group participant

“[Staff] were very welcoming and engaging therefore taking part was an enjoyable experience. Attendees given every opportunity to contribute in an inclusive way.” Core client group participant