Efforts to digitalise welfare services in the UK are still hindered by problems with the interoperability of systems and in estimating costs and savings, according to a new government report.
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has published an evidence review on digitalising welfare services, based on research carried out by RAND Europe, aiming to build up the evidence base around the impacts of digitalisation.
The research involved a scoping review, manual searches and interviews with stakeholders.
Among its findings is that limited operability across computer systems and the fragmentation of information are seen as obstacles to the digitalisation of relevant services. This is partly due to the limited ability to quantify the costs and savings of interoperability.
It can only be improved through broader coordination and standardisation within the DWP and across public services, with elements including common architectures, common data sources, standards access for multiple users and standard business models and contracts, the report says.
Limits of progress
On the broader costs and savings of digitalising services, it makes the point that across the public sector the effort has often been limited to simple transactional tasks, and savings might offset by increased demand spurred by the digitalisation. Also, the extent of savings can depend on other factors such as staff training and support.
The report also identifies strategies that can encourage the public to make more use of online services. These involve designing services with a consideration of usefulness and ease of use, the preferences and abilities of different population segments, and the aesthetic experience.
It makes the point that if digital services increase the burden for users or replace that require urgent or very personal attention, they will fail to replace in-person services.
It also says there is evidence from the experience of the Covid-19 pandemic that, while it accelerated the development of digital services, the process has highlighted the risk of digital exclusion for some vulnerable people, and that non-digital options should still be made available.
