Apply for your first provisional licence
The report for the Apply for your first provisional driving licence alpha assessment on 21 January 2021
Service Standard assessment report
Apply for your first provisional licence
| From: | Government Digital Service |
| Assessment date: | 21/01/21 |
| Stage: | Beta |
| Result: | Not met |
| Service provider: | DfT/DVLA |
Previous assessment reports
Service description
The service will allow users to apply for a provisional driving licence and be granted provisional driving entitlement for applicable vehicles with the aim of taking a test. The service allows users to fulfil their legal obligation before learning to drive. The service will also provide users the ability to upload a photo and have it confirmed by another person. Successful users will be able to fulfil any additional application tasks without failing to a paper process.
Service users
Overview of service users
- users who wish to learn to drive
- users who have driving licences from another country that we don’t mutually recognise and need to pass a test.
- users aged older than 15 years and 9 months
- users aged 16-24 years old make up 75% of annual applicants.
High level user needs this service aims to meet
- as a learner, I need to have a provisional driving licence so that I can learn to drive.
- as a non-Passport holder, I need to submit a digital photo of myself so that I can complete my application online.
- as a GB Passport holder, I need to submit an alternative digital photo so that my photo is recent and a true likeness.
- as an applicant, I need simple and accessible user interaction with guidance so that I confidently complete and submit my application.
- as an applicant, I need to be informed of progress and supplementary tasks so that I don’t progress chase with a call centre.
1. Understand users and their needs
Decision
The service did not meet point 1 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the user research was rigorous, thoroughly testing designs and repeatedly revisiting issues
- the user research was regular and plentiful, providing ongoing insight
- the team maintained a strong commitment to testing with users with a range of access issues
- the team identified that the service will need to respond to the needs of users with medical conditions that may affect their interaction with the service. They ensured that testing regularly took place with this user group
- the team undertook retrospective interviews with users in private beta, responding to the recommendation in the Alpha report. This enabled the team to get insight on the live user journey
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- design and test journeys that meet the needs of more diverse users. The panel is concerned that testing mirrored a limited service scope, which over-prioritised the needs of young applicants without medical conditions
- understand and articulate user needs and design solutions which are particular and representative of users with a medical condition or users who are non-UK nationals. These users should be represented across all UR outputs, including personas
- understand and respond to complex journeys across multiple devices. Although the team recognised that journeys across multiple devices were significantly slower than mobile-only journeys, they did not present ways in which designs had changed in response to these insights. The panel expected to see some design thinking in the open, with designs that responded specifically to user needs identified through research. Without this, the panel found it hard to understand how well-defined the user need was
- retrospective interviews with users who fail the online journey. The panel are interested to understand the needs of users who start on the online journey and are forced to then move to paper applications. Understanding and representing these users will help to develop the problem space which new service functionality will address
2. Solve a whole problem for users
Decision
The service did not meet point 2 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the service works particularly well on mobile. This response to identified user expectations and provides an additional benefit by making the service accessible to users who only access the internet through a smartphone
- research enabled the team to understand the complexities of a multi-device journey and the reasons that complex journeys occur
- the team are exploring the role of DVLA staff and internal UI change as a way to improve the user experience
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- design and test features of the service which will allow a more diverse cohort of applicants to access the service. The panel were concerned that the service has limited its scope. In doing so, it is excluding users. The panel is concerned that the users excluded from the service are more likely to be already disadvantaged. This includes people with medical conditions and people without valid UK passports (potentially for economic reasons, or because they are not UK nationals)
- prioritise the research with users who would fail the current online journey. The panel felt that ‘the whole problem is likely to be more complex for these user groups, but limited research in this space prevents us from understanding how the team are responding to this wider scope
- understand and articulate genuine AD needs and how these are met by the AD roadmap, which currently proposes Webchat as an AD solution
3. Provide a joined-up experience across all channels
Decision
The service did not meet point 3 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the service team have implemented text alerts to supplement the offline journey
- significantly reduced the number of physical ID documents held at the DVLA, reducing the verification backlog for offline applicants
- the team are aware that the offline journey could be improved for users, in particular, some of the content within the current “D1 form” requires updating
- the team have improved the journey for users in relation to acknowledging receipt of documentation by using gov notify to advise users that their application is being progressed
- the team have assisted in introducing new business processes enabling the swift verification and return of official identification documentation to service users. This has reduced processing times and created a better user experience
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- clearly demonstrate what activity has been undertaken to ensure that users who are unwilling/unable to use the digital service are not disadvantaged
- demonstrate what steps have been taken to address AD needs, and if existing AD tools are being used e.g webchat, clearly demonstrate how the user need is being met
- clearly explain how the user experience will not be compromised should a user have to move between the new online service and the old online service
- at the moment the service redirects most of the users with medical conditions to its legacy system which is not accessible. Users with medical conditions are often the most vulnerable user group and accessible channels should be considered to protect them
4. Make the service simple to use
Decision
The service met point 4 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the team has used known design patterns and gov.uk design system
- the team is collaborating with other departments such as HMPO to make sure best practices across departments are being shared
- the team has considered the different user groups and their high-level needs and has demonstrated plans to address all those user needs
- the team is in contact with the GOV.UK transaction team and have created necessary eligibility guidelines and a start page to be part of the step by step process for learning to drive
- the team has identified the various constraints and developed strategies to overcoming them such as they have created an internal platform for signature verification
- the team is part of a wider program and focused on the online channel only but is actively collaborating with other teams responsible for other channels such as paper format to create a joined-up experience
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- review the journey where a user might come back to the service to check their status. As in its current form users need to provide a lot of information before they could retrieve their service status
- maintain transparency and communicate key details such as service cost, payment receipt etc. to the user in a timely manner
- should ensure user with assisted digital support get the same user experience while using the service
- the user research has identified that a fair proportion of users are supported by their parents or carers to complete the journey. This could have security implications while sharing personal details and payment information. A suggestion would be to identify those imuse cases and find solutions to protect against data leaks
5. Make sure everyone can use the service
Decision
The service met point 5 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the team is aware of the current limitations and has a robust plan on improving it iteratively
- the team has a good understanding of accessibility needs and has plans to test accessibility needs before each release cycle
- the team has had an initial engagement with the Digital Accessibility Centre and assured that formal accessibility reviews and statements will be in place before the service goes public beta
- the team ensures that the pages will have a Welsh equivalent and be tested with Welsh speakers before it goes public beta
- the team has reported that they have tested the accessibility of their internal services with their staff during development cycles and private beta
- the team confirms that they have tested their service against the common accessibility user profiles as mentioned in the GOV.UK website
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- research on how the service usage of web chat as an assisted digital support is meeting user needs
- research on users who would use the service for identification purposes, who do not have a UK passport, foreign-born people and non-native English speakers.
- some of the features that were planned as recommendations from the alpha stage are deprioritised, while it is necessary to do so where needed but this might have a serious impact on some of the key user journeys. For example, uploading photos by the user is a significant user need that impacts a fair proportion of users and failing to deliver it earlier might mean users fall back to other channels which are not accessible
- as the service caters to a fair proportion of users comprises users under the age of 18 years age, non-native English speakers, users with medical conditions etc., it is significant to test the reading level of the language against those users and make sure the service is inclusive.
- make sure the content and accessibility recommendations made in the reports are addressed
6. Have a multidisciplinary team
Decision
The service met point 6 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- there is a multidisciplinary team in place that is made up of permanent civil servants and there was minimal use of contractors – these were only in a small technical capacity
- there are no outstanding vacancies and “churn” within the team is low
- the same team will continue to work together as the service iterates, this provides continuity across the service and shows a clear commitment to the ongoing development of the service
- it was apparent that should there be any areas that require additional capacity there are processes in place that will secure additional capacity and / or capability when required
- there are strong relationships in place with internal and external stakeholders enabling the team to move forward at pace.
7. Use agile ways of working
Decision
The service met point 7 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the team use multiple collaboration tools in order to ensure all team members are included in ceremonies and co-creation sessions. It is evident that the team have adapted well to remote working
- demos are recorded and published on a central teams channel, with a monthly town hall held for the wider group – show and share sessions are well attended
- the team is one of several work streams which are loosely coupled and demonstrated good working relationships across all workstreams, sharing outputs and supporting service design that has continuity for users
- there is a governance process in place that allows the team to escalate where necessary – this has assisted in the removal of blockers
- the team has a process in place to clearly catalogue design iterations based on User Research feedback
8. Iterate and improve frequently
Decision
The service did not meet point 8 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the team demonstrated that they had learned from users and considered other designs in order to meet user needs and these have been iterated a number of times
- the service team have a clear understanding of the service users who are excluded from using the service in its current state and demonstrated how the service could be iterated to enable more users to access the new digital channel
- the team have some strong links across other government departments, particularly HMPO where research and design iterations in relation to photo upload have been shared
- there have been a number of design iterations in relation to signature and photo upload since the last assessment that have been well received by service users
- the Service Team has considered how service improvement can be measured
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- consider the end-to-end service for all users, the current service iterations have focused on a narrow cohort and have been constrained to certain user journeys, these have primarily been in relation to photo and signature upload for young applicants without a health condition
- have implemented and tested some of the core functionality that has been articulated as “functionality” to support Public Beta during the Private Beta phase.
- prioritise the Design and research of further iterations during Private Beta to provide assurance that the service can scale quickly to incorporate a wider cohort of users if it is to move into public beta
- have a clear research plan in place to enable design iteration across the broader user journey
- ensure that the demo shown in the assessment is the most up-to-date version
- when iterating the service, consider the impact on the user experience across all channels to ensure continuity of service irrespective of the channel used.
- ensure that data insight is used when making value-based design decisions and measuring service success
9. Create a secure service which protects users’ privacy
Decision
The service met point 9 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the team has explored different avenues for identity management and authentication
- there are data retention policies in place for the application and fulfilment data
- the data is encrypted in transit, Private ApiGateways are in use and data is separated in the Kubernetes cluster
- secure access to the data is ensured and only a limited number of security-cleared staff have access to it with access monitoring in place
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- explore the need to encrypt data backups and test that data can be recovered from them
- continue the work on the current mainframe d90 to ensure data retention policies are appropriate
- implement the alpha recommendation to consider extra antivirus scanning on s3 storage buckets
10. Define what success looks like and publish performance data
Decision
The service met point 10 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that the team:
- has identified key performance indicators (KPIs) specific to the service (% of users getting through first time was the ‘headline’ KPI)
- made extensive use of tagging in GA to identify, for example, which options are selected, where validation errors occur, where users drop out
- gets relevant data from call centres on where and why users require help
- are able to see processing times for different steps in the journey (signature, payment etc)
- had examples of where data has helped them to improve the service
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- clarify the advice given to users on the acceptance of cookies
- encourage digital take-up among user groups who currently go straight to the paper form
11. Choose the right tools and technology
Decision
The service met point 11 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the architecture is modular and scalable
- there is automated zero downtime deployment into production and new features go through the right levels of approvals
- there is automated end-to-end testing for the service
- infrastructure-as-code is used increasing speed in deployment and consistency with relevant health checks in place
- the service team is engaged with the wider technical teams in DVLA, including cyber security
- an infrastructure audit was carried out by an external company, including penetration tests, and no issues were reported
- the team understands the risks the existing mainframe presents and is trying to move away from it in the near future
- the team has separate environments for testing where no real data is used in the pre-production environment
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- undertake a rigorous study identifying the potential threats to the service and data stored before new features involving identity, photo and signature are deployed. Additionally, there are plans to move away from the current mainframe. All these actions have the potential to substantially change the architecture of the service and present new risks and threats to the existing service
- complete an end-to-end performance test, including all external integrations
- although theoretically, the system can safely scale, it needs to be tested
- understand and describe the points of integration that the new photo and signature modules will bring and identify the potential threats to the service, testing this where possible
12. Make new source code open
Decision
The service did not meet point 12 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the team has opened some of the code in GitHub:
- https://github.com/BillyRuffian/faker_maker (testing framework)
- https://github.com/BillyRuffian/chutney (testing)
- https://github.com/dvla/platform-frontend (cloud platform utilities UI)
- https://github.com/dvla/dvla-wizardflow (Updates to follow)
- the team is in discussions with the Cabinet Office for possible sharing of code for signature capture solution for voting purposes
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- explore publishing their code in an open repository to increase transparency, flexibility and accountability. While we understand this is a decision outside the service team’s control, it is still a recommendation that will benefit DVLA and the wider government
- ensure the code already open in GitHub is kept up to date
13. Use and contribute to open standards, common components and patterns
Decision
The service met point 13 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the team has reused multiple screens from DVLA
- the team has used government technology components such as Notify and Pay
- they have used and created APIs to enable flexibility in their service
- the team is in conversations with other government departments, in particular Cabinet Office, about sharing some of its code
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- explore existing login/account options within the government and determine whether any is suitable for the service
- share details of any new components or patterns they create or adapt with wider government
- implement the alpha report recommendation to explore sharing of the image manipulation api, so once in beta other government departments could benefit from this
14. Operate a reliable service
Decision
The service did not meet point 14 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the service team is performing continuous IT health checks and has access monitoring in place
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- ensure the existing monitoring tools and KPIs are valid for potential new features and/or new architecture being developed and do not impact the quality of service
- formalise a disaster recovery plan considering what will happen if the external interfaces were unavailable (HMPO for photo)