Social Security Experience Panels: agency buildings

Summary

Reasons for visiting an agency building

Over eight in ten survey respondents said they would want some form of face to face interaction with the agency at one point, with just over two thirds saying they would visit an agency building to do so. Participants had various reasons for wanting face to face interaction. Some participants felt using the phone was difficult due to their health condition, others told us that they valued face to face contact. There was a recurring perception amongst participants that face to face meetings were a good way to get advice, reassurance or an immediate answer to their queries.

A small number of participants said they would not want any face to face interaction. This was typically due to their disability making travel or social situations difficult to manage however some simply preferred doing things online.

The most common reason for wanting to visit an agency building was to get advice on eligibility, or to make an application. Just under two thirds would also visit to get information about other support available to them. Less than half of survey respondents said they would visit the agency in person to check the status of an application.

There was no significant association between respondent location and their desire for face to face contact, suggesting respondents in urban and rural locations have similar expectations for the level of face to face contact they would want with the agency.

The location of agency buildings

Survey and focus group participants told us that they wanted a centrally located building with a large car park. Many participants said they expected there to be drop-off spaces in front of the building to cater to mobility-impaired clients. Participants could recall times where visiting an office had been made more difficult due to lack of parking or the building being in a remote location.

A small number of participants requested buildings be near public transport, however many said they could not, or did not want to rely on public transport as it was stressful, unreliable and took too long.

Participants told us that having benches on the route from the car park to the building would allow them to rest as they walked to the front door. This was seen to be particuarly important if there was an uphill walk to the entrance.

Co-location

Social Security Scotland will have a local presence throughout Scotland. To achieve this, the agency may have to co-locate within the buildings of other organisations. Survey respondents were mostly happy for the agency to co-locate with their local authority, Citizen's Advice Bureau or at a local NHS site. Around two thirds of survey respondents said they would be very happy or happy with these locations.

Focus group participants tended to not have strong opinions around co-location, however some had strong views about certain buildings. Some participants said that local authority staff were perceived as 'unfriendly' and that sharing a building with them would be 'problematic'. Others told us that local authority buildings tended to be old and therefore may not be the most accessible. Co-locating in specific NHS sites was said to be unwise by some participants due to a lack of space and poor parking provision.

Co-locating within DWP buildings was the most contentious proposal, with less than half of survey respondents being very happy or happy for this to happen.

How agency buildings should look

Focus group participants told us the external look of the building was important, as it could influence their initial perceptions of the agency. Few participants gave specific examples of what buildings should look like, with most saying they should be different from those used by DWP.

Participants were split on how easy it should be to identify the buildings, with some pointing out that people may not want others to know why they were visiting. However others were happy for the building to be easily identified, pointing out that local people would know what the building was irrespective of how it was signed. Many participants felt that the building should be signposted from public transport and the car park, with signs displaying the walking distance to the building.

The interior of agency buildings

Focus group participants felt the interior of the buildings should be 'relaxed' and 'friendly' however they had different interpretations of this in practice.

For some, open plan spaces were a negative as they were noisy and risked people overhearing them when they talked. Other people felt that a bright open space could be refreshing.

A number of participants gave accessibility related reasons for their views. For example, one participant did not want white walls as they caused glare in his eyes. Another suggested bright lighting could cause difficulties for people with autism.

Participants felt the accoustics of the building were important, wanting noise levels to be kept relatively low.

In terms of furniture, participants told us that having varied and sufficient seating was critical to them being able to navigate the building easily. They felt that barriers, such as screens between clients and staff were not needed and did not create a welcoming atmosphere. Furniture should cater to client's accessibility needs, such as having a lowered reception desk for wheelchair users.

Facilities of agency buildings

Focus group and survey participants told us that providing the right facilities would help make clients feel 'safe and comfortable'.

Nine in ten survey respondents wanted accessible toilets, and six in ten wanted a changing places toilet. There was moderate demand for baby changing facilities and a gender neutral toilet (around a quarter).

In terms of the waiting area, almost eight in ten participants said they would like leaflets and information on support services and a suitable waiting area for their helper, carer or advocate. A ticket queuing system, something to do whilst waiting and a soft seating area were also supported by more than half of participants.

Other facilities participants expected included private interview rooms, supported by nine in ten and a refreshment area. Participants were less interested in the agency providing an area for children to play, with some pointing out that should be the parents' job. Other participants said that having things for children to do may manage noise levels and make the area more pleasant.

Telling the agency your needs

In the future, Social Security Scotland may allow clients to state their accessibility needs in advance of visiting an agency venue. Over nine in ten respondents told us they wanted to be able to do this. The most popular option for telling the agency about accessibility needs was by email, with more than eight in ten respondents preferring this method. Telephone and through an app were also popular, with over six in ten saying they would like to tell the agency this way. The least popular methods were through a third party and face to face, with less than three in ten respondents opting for this.

The most popular accessible way of telling the agency about accessibility needs was through the BSL Scotland line (an online video relay interpreting service).

Duration of visit

We asked survey respondents how long they would be able to speak to a member of agency staff if they did come to a building for a meeting. Just over nine in ten respondents said they could speak for more than 15 minutes, and two thirds for more than 30 minutes. Just under two in ten said they could speak for more than 60 minutes.

We asked respondents what they would want to happen if a conversation had to go on for longer than they felt able to talk. Three quarters of respondents wanted the ability to arrange a follow-up meeting. Just over one in ten wanted to arrange more than one meeting to start with or wanted to finish the conversation as quickly as possible.

Privacy

Respondents told us that having a private space when talking about their health or other personal information was important. Almost all respondents said it was also important to be in a private space when getting advice on eligibility, making complaints or getting advice for someone else.

Participants told us that a private space was somewhere you couldn't be overheard, but this didn't necessarily mean a separate room. Some participants told us that a booth with high walls could be acceptable if it was private enough. Participants advised against using screens to separate spaces, as they felt they did little to stop people overhearing conversations.

Paper Applications

Four in ten survey respondents said they would always apply for their benefits by paper, and just under a third said they would apply by paper sometimes. A quarter of respondents said they would never want to apply by paper, preferring to do so online.