Manage the money you owe to DWP alpha assessment
The ‘Manage the money you owe to DWP’ service will allow users to see their debt information in one place.
Digital Service Standard assessment report
Manage the money you owe to DWP
| From: | Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) |
| Assessment date: | 10/10/19 |
| Stage: | Alpha |
| Result: | Met |
| Service provider: | Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) |
Previous assessment reports
There are no previous GDS Assessments/Reports
Service description
The current service to DWP debt customers is fragmented, and requires users to phone different parts of DWP to understand the totality of their debt situation.
The ‘Manage the money you owe to DWP’ service will allow users to see their debt information in one place.
The new service will deliver a secure, 24/7 on-line self-service capability that will enable debtors to actively manage their debts to DWP by;
- accessing/understanding information relating to their debts, and
- making repayments (both one-off and sustainable repayment plans) without the need for telephony or postal intervention
Customers currently face long telephony waiting times, which leads to delays in managing their debts. The new service will enable users to enquire and manage their debts at a time that suits them, whilst reducing the volume of calls for DWP Debt Management.
Service users
Citizens who owe money to government. They may be;
- individuals, couples or a household in receipt of benefit
- individuals, couples or a household previously in receipt of benefit
- people who deal on behalf of an individual, such as friends, family or debt advice
- next of kin
Additionally, the service is used by;
- solicitors
- insurance companies
- employers
1. Understand user needs
Decision
The service met point 1 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the panel was impressed with the range of research the team has done in Discovery. This included around 34 qualitative interviews, ethnographic research observing people in debt centres and a number of telephone interviews to ensure geographic scale
- the team also ensured they did research people who might be particularly vulnerable when using the service, this included people with a range of mental health conditions. The team also involved national organisations to help with research, recruitment and observation
- the team has written user needs which encompass a diverse group of service users, based on the research done in discovery
- the team has also written personas to illustrate the most important situations people will be in when they need to use the service. This helps to communicate who the users of the service are and what they need from it
- the team has done a large amount of call analysis on around 1,900 calls. The analysis looked at all potential users of the service from discovery and analysed their reason for calling. This helped the team move into alpha, and helped to decide which users to focus on first
- the team has also done research with internal users as part of their discovery and presented findings about their needs and pain points in helping to support the current service
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- do research to find the best way to meet the needs of their users. This includes investigating whether the debt service could and should be part of Universal Credit see point 12
- expand the scope of the service to meet more of the user needs identified in the Discovery and provide an acceptable rationale for the needs they’re not trying to meet with the service. This includes researching whether high-level user need is met by a service called Manage the money you owe to DWP, particularly if people’s mental model of the debt is being part of Universal Credit rather than DWP
- when reporting on the service performance the team should ensure that they’re identifying KPIs which highlight the areas the service isn’t performing so well or where it’s harder to meet their needs. At the next assessment the team should demonstrate a link between user needs and the service performance framework, to show how they’re analysing how well the service is working for all needs identified, not just the ones which are easier to meet
- for this service the team has picked a focused set of needs for one group of users (people who have come off benefit and owe money to DWP). At the next assessment the team should demonstrate that they’ve thought about the model of service (Repay money you owe to DWP) and how well that maps to the mental model users have of their debt. There’s potential that the range of debts and benefits could cause confusion for some users, so the team should justify that this isn’t an issue and demonstrate the name and scope of this service is appropriate for all users they’re planning to include
- before the next assessment the team should work with parts of the service which the delivery team isn’t in charge of, but which have an impact on user needs. One important example that should definitely be looked at is DWP’s policy about setting up a regular repayment. Consider the range of options available to people throughout the time they have debt with DWP, and not just when setting up a repayment, but when changing the repayment or missing a payment and all other potential scenarios. The team should demonstrate they have a detailed understanding of how the policy on repayments impacts user needs and work with people in charge of the policy to make it more user-centred and to help the service do a better job of meeting user needs. Another important example of this is the parts of Universal Credit which issue the debts to users, the team should work with this team to share research, user needs and performance metrics. Another important example of this is the DWP authentication service. There maybe other areas which impact the ability of the service to meet user needs, which the team should research and try to influence and improve
2. Do ongoing user research
Decision
The service met point 2 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the panel was impressed with the usability research that the team has done and how this research has driven the iterative development of the service prototype
- the team researched the user journey from receiving a letter to setting up a payment plan or paying off the debt owed to DWP
- the team has taken steps to protect research participants from being negatively impacted by the service, which could happen if for example participants attributed the debt in the prototype as being real for them. The team has used fake data and were transparent with participants about the research and how it was set up, without undermining the study
- the team let people explore the service, using the letter to set the scenario for participants. This allowed the team to explore people’s needs and priorities in relation to the service
- the team’s last round of research tested the reminders and notifications. This demonstrates that the team is looking at the usability specific tasks which might not work as expected or which some users might find difficult
- the team has also researched the payment journey which connects to the service, and has generated useful feedback which has been passed onto the GOV.UK Pay team
- the team has done research with people who aren’t confident going online to use services. They have considered how the service can still work for people who don’t want to go online, as well has how to support people over the phone who are using the online service, but don’t feel totally confident doing so
- the team’s plans for future research provide a great complement to the work already done. The panel was impressed that their beta plans will look to test the end to end journey more thoroughly and more realistically, including looking at the assisted digital user journey
- the team’s future research plans also include research on the live service and extension of the support ticket analysis as well as continuing usability studies. The team hopes to do some Diary studies, this or and similar method to understand people’s real-life context and use over time would provide an excellent complement to the research already done
- the team tested with 11 users with different disabilities. Hearing impairments. People who don’t use assistive tech. When the team start to build that will ramp up. Also when it comes to researching the team used a range of assistive tech and will make sure this is constantly reviewed
- the team gave evidence of a number of iterations to the service. In particular setting up a repayment plan, which they’ve redesigned the process from what happens currently over the phone
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- if the team is using satisfaction surveys and analytics data to highlight problems with the service before doing more in depth research the team should ensure that the surveys and analytics are set up to record areas where users will struggle with the service. For example a satisfaction survey after setting up a repayment plan might show there are no problems, but consider how to record people’s satisfaction when they can’t complete a task, like changing their repayment plan. At the next assessment the team should demonstrate that they’re looking for where the service is performing badly rather than just recording when the service works well
- the team should look at testing more realistic scenarios and ideally do research with live data (this could be more contextual). This will require thinking about safeguarding and ethics, but it will allow the team some genuine insight into how users will manage tasks that require them to make a decision or reflection about their finances. Tasks for which this seems particularly relevant include: setting up a plan, changing a plan (or having the payment declined, or realising you can’t pay), as well as viewing a statement (which shows past transactions)
- the team should demonstrate that they’ve researched and iterated the content in the service for tasks which require this decision making or reflection. The current prototype isn’t transparent about the range of amounts someone can enter for setting up regular payments, in a real life scenario this could be frustrating and stressful for users to work out what to enter or guess
- the team should continue their research with internal users, in particular thinking about the areas of this service which staff users will have to support. What are the bits of the service which they will find difficult when the service goes live. This seems to be a relatively unexplored area because the team’s research with internal users is based on Discovery research before this service was developed. At the next assessment the team should demonstrate that they’ve understood the role of internal users in the new service and design the service to meet their needs
3. Have a multidisciplinary team
Decision
The service met point 3 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the service team is empowered to deal with issues across the whole service, and the positive relationship they had with the business. The panel felt that moving forward this will continue to help shape the service to meet the user needs and organisational objectives
- the team had a good balance of skills and experience, with decision makers embedded into the team
- the collocated team has sustainable funding in place, in the short-term, and a balanced, blended mix of Civil Servants and Contractors
- the panel was pleased that the Product Owner has responsibility for both the front and back ends of the service
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- the team has somebody taking on some of the duties of a Service Designer, with a plan moving forward to fill this role full-time. It was felt by the panel that this was a key missing role and would help the team greatly if this role could be filled as a priority
4. Use agile methods
Decision
The service met point 4 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the team was creating an iterative user-centred service, using agile methods to inspect, learn and adapt as they go
- the team has used a blend of user research and data analysis to gain real insights which was well evidenced throughout the assessment
- the panel was impressed with how the team is getting (senior) stakeholders involved in user research
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- ensure they continue to focus on “product”, rather than “project” to ensure they keep the focus on sustainable, continuous iterative development to meet user needs and business goals
5. Iterate and improve frequently
Decision
The service met point 5 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the panel was impressed with the team’s service roadmap and the plans moving forward to meet user needs
- the team evidenced well how they have iterated and improved the service based on user research and data analysis
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- consider undertaking more research to review options around expanding the scope of the service to meet more needs
6. Evaluate tools and systems
Decision
The service met point 6 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the team is using a cloud hosted platform (AWS but plans to move to MS Azure)
- Node.js (as endorsed by GDS) is used to program front end
- the service is being built in an Agile manner
- DevOps are being used for software production (including using Jenkins)
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- provide an update on progress from moving hosting from AWS to MS Azure
7. Understand security and privacy issues
Decision
The service met point 7 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the service has a security threat model
- encryption is used
- the team has reviewed GDPR and no personally identified data needs to be stored
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- develop an end to end testing plan which covers any security implications at each stage of testing
8. Make all new source code open
Decision
The service did not meet point 8 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the panel has been told that service does code in the open with code available for sharing on a github repository however at point of writing this access is needed to DWP GitLab - which one can only access via a DWP Macbook with a specific build
- open source code used for service has been borrowed from other parts of DWP which is a good example of code reuse
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- provide a web link to open source code accessible by GDS assessors
9. Use open standards and common platforms
Decision
The service met point 9 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- Gov.Notify is used by service
- Gov.Pay is used by service
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- continue to follow client facing front end architecture standards and also to reference GDS Service Design Standard and the Technical Code of Practice
- liaise with Student Loan Company to see if there is scope for sharing of good practice
10. Test the end-to-end service
Decision
The service met point 10 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- there is an aspiration for using user research to plan end to end testing
- there is plan for testing with less than 1000 consumers - by invite only
- the front end of the service (which is in scope for assessment) can be fully tested
- although there are challenges in testing with the off the shelf back end service (which is not in scope for assessment), the team is working with the supplier to this end
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- use user research to plan for testing with consumers
- produce an end to end testing plan
- continue to work with the supplier on testing
11. Make a plan for being offline
Decision
The service met point 11 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the current telephone option provides the ability for users to make payment if the service is offline
- automatic failover and automatic scaling is provided through use of cloud hosted platform
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- a service level agreement to be worked out stating contingency measures to be taken if service goes offline
- smarter use of telephone routing would be recommended to ensure the most vulnerable, or most in need of a conversation are prioritised in the call queue
12: Make sure users succeed first time
Decision
The service did not meet point 12 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the service uses simple, common components and patterns and a ‘one thing per page’ approach
- the team iterated on the approach taken on the telephone service, and found another approach could work better online. This might make a good blog post
- the team showed good iteration on the ‘dashboard’ based on user research
- the service has excellent integration with GOV.UK Pay for a consistent user experience in paying government
- the team has considered the emotional aspect of debt in the content design, and linked to support organisations at key points in the journey
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- investigate meeting these needs within the Universal Credit service. The panel heard that all users of this service would be Universal Credit users. Point 12 of the standard says:
“All users should be able to complete the task your service provides the first time they try, as quickly and easily as possible.”
It seems like the quickest and easiest solution for users would be to perform this task within Universal Credit. A new service means:
- a new username and password to know about and remember
- a new service to know about and website address to remember
- a new interface to navigate and understand
The panel heard it would be technically difficult to incorporate a debt repayment feature in Universal Credit, and users might think about the two things differently. However, given the advantages of adding this feature to UC, it’s important to investigate this solution as a prototype in user research in order to understand the difference in behaviour and ease of use
- investigate using a ‘single sign in’ feature for both Universal Credit and Debt Management. This is a possible alternative to the above approach with potentially some of the same advantages. The panel heard that in future, a single username and password may be used to access DWP services. However this still has the potential drawback of users needing to know about two services (Universal Credit and Debt Management). There is also the risk of having this service (Debt Management) rely on a ‘single sign in’ feature that does not yet exist. For those two reasons the panel recommends testing both approaches (Universal Credit and Single Sign in) in user research to understand more
13. Make the user experience consistent with GOV.UK
Decision
The service met point 13 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the design is simple and makes good use of existing GOV.UK Design System components and patterns
- the team had considered ways to make the experience consistent with Universal Credit, where users have come from
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- if the service remains standalone (see point 12), investigate the dashboard design a little more. The ‘cards’ approach does seem to be working with users, but it seems to be a slightly inconsistent use of that pattern. Cards are normally used more for 1) browsing a group of similar things that 2) need the ‘card’ format for a longer description. This is not necessarily true here - the cards don’t all need description, and some actions are clearly different and more common than others (Repay vs Contact for example)
14. Encourage everyone to use the digital service
Decision
The service met point 14 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the team had made changes to the letter encouraging users to take up the digital service
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- further work will be needed on the promotion of the service as it moves into beta
15. Collect performance data
Decision
The service met point 15 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the panel was impressed with the data that had been collected during the discovery and alpha stages, and how it was used to iterate the service
- the team will have access to a wealth of data in the backend of the service and have started to think about how to collect this
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- do further work on how best to collect and exploit the data that will be available in the new backend
16. Identify performance indicators
Decision
The service met point 16 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- performance indicators have been identified, with plans in place to collect and report on the data
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- put a process in place to ensure the performance data adds value to the service and is used to iterate it to meet needs
- work with the Universal Credit service which gives out the debt and develop some shared user-centred KPIs to make sure that both services are getting the best outcome for users
17. Report performance data on the Performance Platform
Decision
The service met point 17 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the team intends to utilise the GOV.UK Performance Platform
- there is a central team in DWP that manages the relationship with the GDS Performance team and the uploading of data, including for this service
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- register with the performance platform
- work closely with the internal DWP performance team to determine KPI baselines
- follow the relevant steps in the service standard
18. Test with the minister
Not Applicable at Alpha
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- explain how they’ll test the service with the minister responsible for it
Next Steps
This service can now move into a private beta phase, following the recommendations outlined in the report. The service must pass their public beta assessment before launching their public beta.
The panel recommends this service sits a beta assessment in around 6 months time. Speak to your Digital Engagement Manager to arrange it as soon as possible.
To get the service ready to launch on GOV.UK the team needs to:
- get a GOV.UK service domain name
- work with the GOV.UK content team on any changes required to GOV.UK content