Author: Sarah

Er mai Ynys Môn yw ein lleoliad astudiaeth achos yng Nghymru, mae ein tîm ymchwil hefyd wedi bod yn ymwneud ag ymchwil arall ledled Gogledd Cymru ar y cyd â Rhwydwaith Cyngor Rhanbarthol Gogledd Cymru (RCR). Mae’r swydd hon yn rhoi crynodeb o ddigwyddiad RCR Gogledd Cymru a gynhaliwyd yn hydref 2022, gyda’r nod o archwilio ein dealltwriaeth o gysyniadau’r sector cynghori fel gwybodaeth, cyngor a gwaith achos, fel y maent heddiw.

Rhwydwaith Cyngor Rhanbarthol Gogledd Cymru: Cymunedau o Bobl ac Angen

Yn 2020, sefydlodd Llywodraeth Cymru chwe Rhwydwaith Cyngor Rhanbarthol (RCR) ledled Cymru, ac mae gan bob un Gadeirydd a Grŵp Llywio annibynnol, ynghyd ag aelodaeth o randdeiliaid lleol a rhanbarthol sy’n darparu gwasanaethau cyngor lles cymdeithasol. Nod y RCRs yw mapio angen a darpariaeth cyngor a nodi bylchau, adeiladu rhwydweithiau atgyfeirio, cyfuno profiad i nodi achosion sylfaenol problemau cyffredin a rhannu arfer gorau, a chefnogi ei gilydd i ddarparu cyngor â sicrwydd ansawdd.

Cyflwyniad i’r Digwyddiad

Un o nodau allweddol y digwyddiad RCR oedd trafod dealltwriaeth o ddiffiniadau cyngor a gwybodaeth, ac i ba raddau y mae diffiniadau presennol yn cyd-fynd ag arfer cyfredol. Y diffiniadau a gyflwynwyd fel enghreifftiau i’w trafod oedd y rheini o Fframwaith Ansawdd Gwybodaeth a Chyngor Llywodraeth Cymru (IAQF), a’r rhai sy’n sail i Safon Ansawdd Cyngor Cynghrair y Gwasanaethau Cynghori (AQS). Roedd y trafodaethau yn ystod y sesiwn hefyd yn ymestyn i ystod o faterion dybryd i sefydliadau sy’n darparu gwybodaeth a chyngor: gan gynnwys heriau i ddarparu gwasanaethau, sianeli a ddefnyddir i ddarparu gwybodaeth a chyngor, rhwydweithiau a chysylltiadau, yr “argyfwng costau byw” ac ymgysylltu â cymunedau a phobl â nodweddion gwahanol.

Canfyddiadau a Themâu Allweddol

1. Diffinio termau

• • Mae’r diffiniadau IAQF a AQS yn gyffredinol fuddiol ac yn adlewyrchu’r rhan fwyaf o arferion presennol ar lefel sefydliadol, ond nid yw ymgysylltu â diffiniadau yn rhan o arfer rheolaidd ar gyfer y rhan fwyaf o staff a gwirfoddolwyr.
• • Byddai staff a gwirfoddolwyr yn elwa o hyfforddiant pellach ar ddiffiniadau yng nghyd-destun eu rolau eu hunain, yn enwedig fel nad yw’r awydd i ddarparu cymaint o gymorth â phosibl yn arwain at or-gamu a allai achosi mwy o broblem.
• • Byddai diffiniadau yn elwa o rywfaint o ailystyried yng nghyd-destun adferiad o bandemig Covid-19 a heriau eraill sy’n wynebu’r sector. Mae darparwyr wedi dod yn fwy ystwyth ac addasadwy ar ôl Covid-19, ac efallai nad yw’r fframwaith presennol yn ddigon hyblyg i adlewyrchu hynny, ac mae dosbarthiadau rhy anhyblyg o wasanaethau yn arbennig o bryderus wrth i’r galw gynyddu ymhellach.
• • Yn gyffredinol, ystyrir bod diffiniadau AQS yn fwy cywir a hyblyg na diffiniadau IAQF.
• • Gellid symleiddio fframweithiau trwy gael dau gategori trosfwaol o “wybodaeth” (i gynnwys arweiniad, cyfeirio ac atgyfeirio) ac ail gategori o “gyngor” (i gynnwys is-adrannau cyngor cyffredinol, a gwaith achos cyffredinol ac arbenigol). Mae hyn yn gliriach i’r cyhoedd o ran eu helpu i ddeall gwahanol wasanaethau.
• • Prin yw’r ymwybyddiaeth o’r categori “canllawiau” (a ddefnyddir yn yr IAQF ond nid yn yr AQS); nid yw ei statws yn y set gyffredinol o ddiffiniadau yn cael ei ddeall yn dda ar y cyfan ac ni ddefnyddiwyd y term gan y rhan fwyaf o sefydliadau.
• • Deellir bod diffiniadau a chategorïau’n cael eu defnyddio at ddibenion rheoleiddio a “gwahaniaethwr atebolrwydd”, ystyriwyd bod ychwanegu “canllawiau” fel categori diffiniedig yn gallu cymylu ffiniau rhwng gwasanaethau gwybodaeth heb eu rheoleiddio, a gwasanaethau cynghori rheoledig.
• • Sefydliadau sydd fwyaf pryderus am y rhaniad rhwng “cyngor” a “chyngor cyfreithiol”, ystyriwyd bod y rhaniad hwn yn hollbwysig i sefydliadau ond nid yw IAQF na AQS yn ceisio darparu unrhyw arweiniad ar y ffin hon. Nid yw canfyddiadau sefydliadol bob amser yn cyfateb i realiti’r fframweithiau sy’n cwmpasu gweithgareddau cyfreithiol a reoleiddir a heb eu rheoleiddio.
• • Nid yw rhai sefydliadau llai yn gweld darparu cyngor ar bolisïau, hawliau ac arferion, fel rhan o’u rolau – ac eto mae’r rhain yn elfennau craidd o ddiffiniadau’r ddau fframwaith o “gyngor”.
• • Mae gan gyllidwyr eu categorïau a’u diffiniadau eu hunain a all dorri ar draws IAQF ac AQS.
• • Mae meysydd pwnc hefyd yn bwysig. Nodwyd twf mewn cyngor cynhwysiant ariannol a llesiant ariannol, ond mae diffyg eglurder o ran lle mae hyn yn cyd-fynd â chyngor “cyfraith lles cymdeithasol” yn gyffredinol (a ddiffinnir fel arfer gan faterion pwnc budd-daliadau, dyled, tai, cyflogaeth, cymuned gofal, mewnfudo a lloches ac ati).
• • Gallai brysbennu a chyfeirio elwa o ddiffiniad a chynnwys mwy penodol mewn fframweithiau diffiniol.
• • Nid yw eiriolaeth yn cael ei deall yn dda, gellid gwneud mwy i godi ymwybyddiaeth o’r cysyniad, ac mae angen mwy o ddarpariaeth eiriolaeth y tu hwnt i ofynion statudol.
• • Mae llawer o wasanaethau/prosiectau newydd wedi tyfu i fyny, wedi’u cataleiddio’n rhannol gan bandemig Covid-19 ac yn awr yr “argyfwng costau byw”, mae rhai yn darparu cymorth iechyd meddwl lefel isel, rhywfaint o bresgripsiynu cymdeithasol, a gwahanol fathau o gymorth trwy fathau penodol o galedi. Mae “cymorth” a “chefnogaeth” yn dermau cynyddol gyffredin, ond nid yw’r cysylltiadau rhwng y cysyniadau a’r gwasanaethau hyn ar y naill law, a chysyniadau mwy traddodiadol o “wybodaeth”, “cyngor” ac yn wir “eiriolaeth” ar y llaw arall, bob amser yn glir.

2. Rolau sefydliadau, gwasanaethau, atgyfeiriadau, a chysylltiadau cymunedol

• • Mae sefydliadau mwy yn fwy amlochrog gyda gwahanol lefelau o ddarpariaeth cyngor ar draws meysydd pwnc amrywiol, ond maent yn dal i atgyfeirio pan fydd gan sefydliadau eraill gontract arbenigol perthnasol (gan gynnwys contract cymorth cyfreithiol) neu’n darparu gwasanaeth arbenigol iawn.
• • Mae sefydliadau mwy yn fwy tebygol o fod ag arfer brysbennu gweithredol, nid oes gan sefydliadau llai brysbennu.
• • Mae sefydliadau lleol llai a sefydliadau hunaniaeth yn darparu gwybodaeth yn bennaf, ac maent yn cysylltu â chyngor fel arfer trwy bartneriaethau/atgyfeiriadau at Gyngor ar Bopeth. Mae sefydliadau llai sy’n darparu cyngor yn tueddu i wneud hynny mewn perthynas â phwnc penodol (e.e., cyngor ariannol) a/neu ar gyfer cymuned benodol o hunaniaeth/nodweddion (e.e., ffydd, statws ffoadur), efallai y bydd ganddynt rywfaint o ddarpariaeth cyngor arbenigol “yn- tŷ” a/neu ddod o dan ymbarél sefydliadau cenedlaethol pwnc-benodol ar gyfer atgyfeiriadau mwy cymhleth ymlaen.
• • Mae sefydliadau llai yn gweld eu hunain yn llai tebygol o fod â strwythurau hierarchaidd, yn cael eu staffio’n bennaf neu’n gyfan gwbl gan wirfoddolwyr, gan atgyfnerthu’r angen am bartneriaeth a rhannu gwybodaeth yn fewnol a chyda sefydliadau allanol.
• • Mae ymwybyddiaeth amrywiol o rolau a chysyniadau “cysylltydd cymunedol” neu “llywiwr cymunedol” a sut y gallai rolau o’r fath gysylltu pobl â gwybodaeth a chyngor ar gyfraith lles cymdeithasol ochr yn ochr â chyngor lles mwy cyffredinol.

3. Cyfyngiadau/Heriau wrth roi cyngor

Ariannu

• • Mae cyllid yn fater sylweddol i bob sefydliad, o’r mawr iawn i’r bach iawn.
• • Mae’r rhan fwyaf o sefydliadau’n cael cyllid drwy grantiau o amrywiaeth o wahanol ffynonellau, ac mae’r meini prawf ar gyfer cael gafael ar gyllid yn amrywiol ac yn aml yn gymhleth.
• • Mae rhai ffynonellau cyllid yn gosod cyfyngiadau sylweddol ar gymhwysedd ar gyfer y prosiect/gwasanaeth a ariennir a gall fod â meini prawf adrodd helaeth mewn perthynas â chanlyniadau.
• • Mae natur dameidiog ffynonellau ariannu yn torri yn erbyn nodau sefydliadau mwy i ddarparu gwasanaeth cyfannol. I sefydliadau llai mae ymateb i alwadau a meini prawf gwahanol yn heriol, yn enwedig pan fydd hyn hefyd yn cynnwys cyfyngiadau ar bwy y gellir eu helpu. Gall fod cyfyngiadau cymhleth hefyd ar bwy y gellir eu cyfeirio ymlaen, a sut, gan greu gwaith ychwanegol.
• • Mae rhai ffynonellau ariannu angen tystiolaeth ddiangen o helaeth ymlaen llaw ynghylch pwy fydd yn cael cymorth gan y gwasanaeth (pan fo’r angen, mewn gwirionedd, yn frys ac yn amlwg).
• • Nid yw cyllidwyr bob amser wedi annog gweithio mewn partneriaeth gwirioneddol, gall prosesau tendro fod yn gystadleuol, gan dorri yn erbyn gweithio mewn partneriaeth a chael effaith negyddol ar gynaliadwyedd a chysylltedd hirdymor.
• • Mae natur tymor byr cyllid yn dad-sefydlogi. Mae argaeledd cyllid newydd, ac estyniadau i gyllid presennol, yn aml yn cael eu hysbysebu ar fyr rybudd, gan ei gwneud yn heriol i sefydliadau wneud y defnydd mwyaf effeithlon ac effeithiol o’u hadnoddau. Ni all sefydliadau golyn yn ddigon cyflym i ddarparu’r cynnig gorau o dan gyllid newydd. Mae hyn yn effeithio ar bwy y gellir eu helpu a sut, gan gyfyngu ar yr opsiynau sydd ar gael i sefydliadau a chleientiaid, a niweidio perthnasoedd â phartneriaid.
• • Mae sefydliadau mwy yn dueddol o fod â thargedau sy’n seiliedig ar nifer y bobl a gynorthwyir a/neu’r amser a dreulir gyda chleientiaid, tra nad yw cyllid ar gyfer sefydliadau llai yn tueddu i fod yn amodol ar ofynion o’r fath.
• • Mae cyllid tameidiog newydd yn aml yn seiliedig ar nodi angen nas diwallwyd neu heb ei gydnabod o’r blaen, unwaith y bydd y gwasanaeth newydd yn dechrau mae’n ymddangos bron fel pe bai’r gwasanaeth ei hun wedi creu galw newydd, mae’r gwasanaeth wedyn yn lleddfu’r pwysau ar sefydliadau eraill (e.e., GIG, gwasanaeth y llysoedd ) ond wrth i’r prosiect tymor byr ddod i ben, tra bod yr angen yn cael ei gydnabod yn gliriach (amlwg yn y galw cynyddol) nid yw’r angen yn cael ei ddiwallu bellach, gan gael sgil-effeithiau ar sefydliadau eraill.
• • Nid oes digon o arian ar gyfer gwasanaethau craidd.
• • Mae’r diffyg cyllid craidd a’r angen i ganolbwyntio ar brosiectau tameidiog, tymor byr, newydd, yn cyfyngu ar y gallu i ymgysylltu ag allgymorth, ac mae’n fwyaf niweidiol i allgymorth gwledig.

Staff a Gwirfoddolwyr

• • Dywedodd y rhan fwyaf o sefydliadau fod gostyngiad yn nifer y gwirfoddolwyr, a bod recriwtio a chadw gwirfoddolwyr yn heriol.
• • Nododd sefydliadau mwy fod disgwyliadau a gofynion gwirfoddolwyr wedi cynyddu, yn enwedig o ran yr hyblygrwydd a geisir, tra bod oriau gwirfoddoli a lefelau ymrwymiad cyffredinol wedi lleihau.
• • Roedd sefydliadau llai a sefydlwyd at ddibenion penodol iawn a/neu i helpu grwpiau cleientiaid penodol (fel ffoaduriaid neu bobl mewn ward benodol) sy’n darparu gwybodaeth yn hytrach na chyngor i raddau helaeth, yn tueddu i gael llai o heriau wrth recriwtio gwirfoddolwyr.
• • Ceir anawsterau nodedig wrth recriwtio gwirfoddolwyr a staff Cymraeg eu hiaith.
• • Mae anawsterau recriwtio staff yn gysylltiedig â chyfraddau cyflog, ond hefyd â natur tymor byr y contractau a gynigir, mae diffyg sicrwydd swydd yn gwneud y rolau hyn yn anneniadol.
• • Ar gyfer gwirfoddolwyr (ac i raddau staff) mae hyfforddiant yn cael ei ystyried yn rhy hir ac yn ormod ar-lein. Dylai gwirfoddolwyr a staff fod yn ymgysylltu â chleientiaid cyn gynted â phosibl.
• • Mae diffyg adnoddau a chynnydd yn y galw yn arwain at gyfeirio cleientiaid allan o’r ardal leol, gan effeithio ar y gallu i ddarparu gwasanaeth di-dor/taith cleient.

Argyfwng Costau Byw a Galw Cyffredinol

• • Mae sefydliadau llai yn poeni am wresogi eu heiddo.
• • Mae’r hinsawdd economaidd a rhyfel yn yr Wcrain wedi arwain at fwy o alw a rhagwelir cynnydd pellach.
• • Mae staff a gwirfoddolwyr yn dioddef mwy o bryder, oherwydd llwythi achosion uchel, ond hefyd oherwydd achosion cynyddol gymhleth neu amlochrog ac anallu i helpu.
• • Bu cynnydd mewn sefyllfaoedd lle mae cleient wedi derbyn cyngor, yn hawlio’r holl fudd-daliadau y mae ganddynt hawl iddynt, ond yn dal yn methu â thalu am eu treuliau hanfodol. Dywed staff a gwirfoddolwyr fod ganddynt lai o atebion ar gael a bod hyn yn cael effaith negyddol ar eu lles eu hunain.
• • Mae cynnydd mewn cysylltiadau gan bobl nad ydynt wedi ceisio cyngor o’r blaen, a chan bobl ar incwm isel nad ydynt yn hawlio (ac nad oes ganddynt hawl i) fudd-daliadau.
• • Mae newidiadau cyflym mewn perthynas â chostau ynni a ffynonellau cymorth ariannol yn heriol i sefydliadau ac yn cael eu gwaethygu gan ddiffyg gwirfoddolwyr a throsiant staff cymharol uchel.
• • Bu cynnydd yn y galw mewn perthynas â materion teuluol, yn enwedig ynghylch plant ac ysgariad lle mae angen cyngor cyfreithiol.
• • Nid oes darpariaeth ddigonol o gyngor mewnfudo a lloches ar draws Gogledd Cymru.

4. Sianeli Darparu Cyngor

• • Gall sefydliadau mwy ddarparu gwasanaethau aml-sianel (gwefannau, ffurflenni ar-lein, llinellau cymorth ffôn, apwyntiadau ar-lein a thros y ffôn yn ogystal ag wyneb yn wyneb).
• • Yn aml bydd gan sefydliadau llai wefan neu dudalen Facebook i hysbysebu, ond nid fel sianel ar gyfer rhoi cyngor.
• • Roedd sefydliadau llai yn hyrwyddo rhoi gwybodaeth a chyngor yn bersonol o fewn cymunedau, nid oes digon o esgidiau ar lawr gwlad ar hyn o bryd.
• • Nid oedd sefydliadau mwy a oedd wedi cynnig sesiynau cyngor galw heibio neu apwyntiadau personol fel rhan o allgymorth cymunedol cyn y pandemig Covid-19 wedi dychwelyd i wneud hynny oherwydd diffyg capasiti a galw cynyddol am wasanaethau ar-lein a ffôn ac ati.
• • Mae datblygu a chynnal technoleg yn fwy anodd i fudiadau llai, yn enwedig y rhai sy’n cael eu rhedeg yn bennaf gan wirfoddolwyr.
• • Awgrymodd rhai sefydliadau y bu dibyniaeth ormodol ar gyfryngau cymdeithasol ac y gellid gwneud mwy o ddefnydd o daflenni papur a chylchlythyrau trwy sianeli dosbarthu lleol.

5. Cymunedau o angen, lle neu amgylchiadau

• • Sut mae cleientiaid yn cael mynediad i wasanaethau yn cael ei effeithio gan eu galluoedd digidol a mynediad at dechnoleg.
• • Gall pobl hŷn deimlo stigma a chywilydd sylweddol ynghylch hawlio eu hawliau, mae angen ymgyrch gyhoeddusrwydd eang, proffil uchel wedi’i thargedu at bobl hŷn yng Ngogledd Cymru o hyd.
• • Mae adnoddau’n tueddu i gael eu dyrannu i ardaloedd lle mae’n haws dangos tystiolaeth o angen ac i raddau, galw, am wasanaethau, ond nid yw hyn yn golygu nad oes anghenion yn bodoli mewn ardaloedd eraill, ac yn benodol, mae pocedi o dlodi ac amddifadedd yn bodoli o fewn ac o gwmpas. ardaloedd mwy cefnog ond eto’n tueddu i gael eu hesgeuluso.
• • Nododd rhai sefydliadau amrywiaeth ar draws Gogledd Cymru, gan gynnwys mewn perthynas â chynlluniau a gynlluniwyd i ddarparu cymorth ariannol a meini prawf ar gyfer cael mynediad at y rhain, gan awgrymu bod hyn wedi arwain at sgyrsiau anodd gyda chleientiaid am lefel y cymorth ariannol sydd ar gael yn lleol.

6. Rhwydweithiau ac Amrywiad Rhanbarthol

• • Gall sefydliadau llai deimlo eu bod wedi’u cau allan o rwydweithiau mwy neu deimlo eu bod yn cael anhawster bodloni’r meini prawf i gael eu cydnabod o fewn rhwydweithiau a fframweithiau penodol.
• • Ceir heriau gyda chysylltiadau effeithiol ac effeithlon rhwng gwasanaethau cenedlaethol, megis llinellau cymorth cenedlaethol (lefel Cymru a’r DU), a gwasanaethau lleol.
• • Gall fod amrywiaeth o sefydliadau sy’n darparu’r un mathau o wybodaeth a chyngor ar lefel genedlaethol, rhanbarthol a lleol; mae’n anodd i’r cyhoedd wybod ble i droi, ac mae gwasanaethau’n cael eu dyblygu (weithiau oherwydd arferion cyllidwyr).
• • Mae’n bosibl bod gormod o wahanol gyfeiriaduron, rhwydweithiau, canolbwyntiau rhannu gwybodaeth a mecanweithiau atgyfeirio yn cael eu defnyddio eisoes yng Ngogledd Cymru, pob un â tharddiad, pwyslais a ffocws gwahanol, ond gyda meini prawf sy’n gorgyffwrdd, ac mae rhai ohonynt yn cael eu hystyried yn is-safonol o ran eu perfformiad. swyddogaethau bwriadedig a dod yn hen ffasiwn.
• • Er bod gwerth un porth atgyfeirio a/neu gyfeiriadur wedi’i godi, cydnabuwyd yn yr un modd nad oes angen “ailddyfeisio’r olwyn” a byddai adeiladu ar lwyfannau presennol yn well.
• • Dylai Llywodraeth Cymru ddatblygu’r llwyfannau a’r rhwydweithiau presennol ymhellach yn un porth gan mai Llywodraeth Cymru sydd â’r trosolwg mwyaf helaeth o’r dirwedd gwybodaeth a chyngor, a’r gallu i ddefnyddio’r arferion gorau presennol tra’n osgoi dyblygu.

Whilst our case-study location in Wales is the Isle of Anglesey, our research team have also been involved in other North Wales wide research in association with the North Wales Regional Advice Network (RAN). This post provides a summary of a North Wales RAN event that took place in autumn 2022, aimed at exploring our understanding of advice sector concepts like information, advice and case-work, as they are today. 

North Wales Regional Advice Network: Communities of People and Need

In 2020, Welsh Government established six Regional Advice Networks (RANs) across Wales, each has an independent Chair and Steering Group, plus a membership of local and regional stakeholders in the provision of social welfare advice services. The RANs aim to map advice need and provision and identify gaps, build referral networks, combine experience to identify root causes of common problems and share best practice, and support each other to deliver quality-assured advice.

Introduction to the event

A key aim of the RAN event was to discuss understandings of advice and information definitions, and the extent to which existing definitions fit with current practice. The definitions presented as examples for discussion were those from Welsh Government’s Information and Advice Quality Framework (IAQF), and those underpinning the Advice Services Alliance (ASA) Advice Quality Standard (AQS). The discussions during the session also extended to a range of pressing issues for organisations providing information and advice: including challenges to the delivery of services, channels used to provide information and advice, networks and connections, the “cost of living crisis” and engaging with communities and people with particular characteristics. 

Key Findings and Themes

1. Defining terms

• The IAQF and AQS definitions are generally beneficial and reflect most existing practices at an organisational level, but engaging with definitions is not part of regular practice for most staff and volunteers. 
• Staff and volunteers would benefit from further training on definitions in the context of their own roles, particularly so that the desire to provide as much help as possible doesn’t lead to overstepping which could cause a bigger problem. 
• Definitions would benefit from some revisiting in the context of recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic and other challenges facing the sector. Providers have become more agile and adaptable post Covid-19, and the existing framework may not be sufficiently flexible to reflect that, and overly rigid classifications of services are especially concerning as demand increases further.
• AQS definitions are generally seen as more accurate and flexible than IAQF definitions.
• Frameworks could be simplified by having two overarching categories of “information” (to include guidance, signposting and referral) and a second category of “advice” (to include sub-divisions of generalist advice, and generalist and specialist case-work). This is clearer to the public in terms of helping them understand different services. 
• There is little awareness of the category of “guidance” (used in the IAQF but not in the AQS); its status in the overall set of definitions is generally not well understood and the term was not used by most organisations. 
• Definitions and categories are understood to be used for regulatory and “liability differentiator” purposes, the addition of “guidance” as a defined category was seen as potentially blurring boundaries between unregulated information services, and regulated advice services.
• Organisations are most concerned about the divide between “advice” and “legal advice”, this divide was seen as crucial to organisations yet neither IAQF nor AQS seeks to provide any guidance on this boundary. Organisational perceptions do not always match the reality of the frameworks covering regulated and un-regulated legal activities.
• Some smaller organisations do not see providing advice on policies, rights and practices as part of their roles – yet these are core elements of both framework definitions of “advice”. 
• Funders have their own categories and definitions that can cut across both IAQF and AQS.
• Subject areas are also important. Growth of financial inclusion and financial well-being advice was noted, but there is a lack of clarity as to where this fits with “social welfare law” advice in general (usually defined by subject matters of benefits, debt, housing, employment, community care, immigration and asylum etc).
• Triage and signposting might both benefit from definition and more explicit inclusion in defining frameworks.
• Advocacy is not well-understood, more could be done to raise awareness of the concept, and more advocacy provision is needed beyond statutory requirements. 
• Many new services/projects have grown up, in part catalysed by the Covid-19 pandemic and now the “cost of living crisis”, some provide low level mental health support, some social prescribing, and various forms of help through particular forms of hardship. “Help” and “support” are increasingly common terms, but connections between these concepts and services on the one hand, and more traditional concepts of “information”, “advice” and indeed “advocacy” on the other, are not always clear.

2. Roles of organisations, services, referrals, and community connections 

• Larger organisations are more multi-faceted with different levels of advice provision across various subject areas, but still refer out where other organisations hold a relevant specialist contract (inc. legal aid contract) or provide a very specialist service.
• Larger organisations are more likely to have an operational triage practice, smaller organisations do not have triage.
• Smaller locality-based and identity-based organisations mainly provide information, and they connect to advice usually through partnerships/referrals to Citizens Advice. Smaller organisations providing advice tend to do so in relation to a specific subject (e.g., money advice) and/or for a particular community of identity/characteristics (e.g., faith, refugee status), they may have some specialist advice provision “in-house” and/or come under the umbrella of national subject-area specific organisations for onwards more complex referrals. 
• Smaller organisations perceive themselves as less likely to have hierarchical structures, are staffed mainly or wholly by volunteers, reinforcing the need for partnership and information sharing both internally and with external organisations. 
• There is variable awareness of the roles and concepts of “community connector” or “community navigator” and how such roles could connect people to social welfare law information and advice alongside more general wellbeing advice. 

3. Restraints/Challenges in delivering advice 

Funding

• Funding is a significant issue for all organisations, from the very large to the very small.
• Most organisations receive funding through grants from a range of different sources, and the criteria for accessing funding are variable and often complex.
• Some funding sources place significant restrictions on eligibility for the project/service funded and can have extensive reporting criteria with respect to outcomes.
• The piecemeal nature of funding sources cuts against the aims of larger organisations to provide a holistic service. For smaller organisations responding to different calls and criteria is challenging, especially when this also includes restrictions on who can be helped. There can also be complex restrictions on who can be referred onwards, and how, creating additional work. 
• Some funding sources require unnecessarily extensive evidence in advance as to who will be helped by the service (when the need is, in fact, both urgent and self-evident).
• Funders have not always encouraged genuine partnership working, tender processes can be competitive, cutting against partnership working and negatively impacting long-term sustainability and connectivity.
• The short-term nature of funding is de-stabilising. The availability of new funding, and extensions to existing funding, are often advertised at short notice, making it challenging for organisations to make the most efficient and effective use of their resources. Organisations cannot pivot quickly enough to provide the best offering under new funding. This impacts on who can be helped and how, limiting the options available to organisations and clients, and damaging relationships with partners.
• Larger organisations tend to have targets based on the number of people helped and/or time spent with clients, whereas funding for smaller organisations doesn’t tend to be subject to such requirements.
• Novel piecemeal funding is often based on identifying previously unmet or unrecognised need, once the new service starts it appears almost as if it is the service itself that has created new demand, the service subsequently relieves pressure on other organisations (e.g., NHS, courts service) but as the short-term project finishes, whilst the need is more clearly recognised (evident in increased demand) the need is no longer met, having knock-on effects for other organisations. 
• There is insufficient funding for core services.
• The lack of core funding and need to focus on piecemeal, short-term, novel projects, limits capacity to engage in outreach, and is most damaging to rural outreach.

Staff and Volunteers

• Most organisations reported a fall in volunteer numbers, and that recruitment and retention of volunteers is challenging.
• Larger organisations noted that the expectations and requirements of volunteers had increased, especially in terms of flexibility sought, whilst volunteering hours and general commitment levels had reduced.
• Smaller organisations established for very specific purposes and/or to help particular client groups (such as refugees or people in a particular ward) who largely provide information rather than advice, tended to have less challenges recruiting volunteers.
• There are notable difficulties recruiting Welsh speaking volunteers and staff.
• Difficulties recruiting staff are linked to rates of pay, but also to the short-term nature of contracts on offer, the lack of job security makes these roles unattractive.
• For volunteers (and to some extent staff) training is seen as too long and too much online. Volunteers and staff should be engaging with clients as soon as possible.
• Lack of resources and increased demand leads to clients being referred out of the local area, impacting on capacity to deliver a seamless service/client journey. 

Cost of Living Crisis and General Demand  

• Smaller organisations are concerned about heating their premises.
• The economic climate and war in Ukraine have led to increased demand and further increases are predicted.
• Staff and volunteers are suffering with increased anxiety, due to high caseloads, but also to increasingly complex or multifaceted cases and an inability to help. 
• There has been an increase in situations where a client has received advice, is claiming all benefits they are entitled to, but still not able to cover their essential outgoings. Staff and volunteers report having fewer solutions available and that this negatively impacts their own wellbeing. 
• There is an increase in contacts from people who have not sought advice before, and from people on low incomes not claiming (and not entitled to) benefits.
• Fast-paced changes in relation to energy costs and sources of financial support are challenging for organisations and compounded by a lack of volunteers and comparatively high staff turnover.
• There has been increased demand in relation to family issues, particularly around children and divorce where legal advice is needed.
• There is insufficient provision of immigration and asylum advice across North Wales.

4. Channels of Advice Delivery 

• Bigger organisations tend to provide multi-channel services (websites, online forms, telephone helplines, appointments online and over the telephone as well as in-person).
• Smaller organisations will often have a website or Facebook page to advertise, but not as a channel for delivering advice.
• Smaller organisations championed giving information and advice in-person within communities, there are not currently enough boots on the ground.
• Larger organisations that had offered drop-in advice sessions or in-person appointments as part of community outreach prior to the Covid-19 pandemic had not returned to doing so due to lack of capacity and increased demand for online and telephone services etc.
• Developing and maintaining technology is more difficult for smaller organisations, especially those largely run by volunteers.
• Some organisations suggested there had been excessive reliance on social media and more use could be made of paper leaflets and newsletters through local channels of distribution. 

5. Communities of need, place or circumstances 

• How clients access services is impacted by their digital capabilities and access to technology.
• Older people can feel significant stigma and shame around claiming their entitlements, a high-profile, widespread publicity campaign targeted at older people is still needed in North Wales.
• Resources tend to be allocated to areas where it easiest to evidence both need and to an extent, demand, for services, but this does not mean needs don’t exist in other areas, and specifically, pockets of poverty and deprivation exist in and around more affluent areas yet tend to be neglected. 
• Some organisations reported variability across North Wales, including in relation to schemes designed to provide financial support and criteria for accessing these, suggesting this has led to difficult conversations with clients about the level of financial support available locally.

6. Networks and Regional Variation

• Smaller organisations can feel excluded from larger networks or feel that they have difficulty meeting the criteria to be recognised within particular networks and frameworks. 
• There are challenges with effective and efficient connections between national services, such as national helplines (both Wales and UK level), and local services.  
• There can be a range of organisations delivering the same types of information and advice at both national, regional and local level; it is hard for the public to know where to turn, and services are duplicated (sometimes due to funder practices).
• There may already be too many different directories, networks, information sharing hubs and referral mechanisms in use in North Wales, each with a different origin, emphasis and focus, but with overlapping criteria, some of which are seen as sub-standard in performing their intended functions and become outdated.
• Whilst the value of a single referral portal and/or directory was raised, it was equally acknowledged that there is no need to “reinvent the wheel” and building on existing platforms would be better.
• Welsh Government ought to further develop existing platforms and networks into a single portal as Welsh Government has the most extensive overview of the information and advice landscape, and the capacity to draw on existing best practice whilst avoiding duplication. 

The purpose of our first blog is to provide some background information to our research and to introduce our four case study areas with a brief description of each. 

The aim of our research is to investigate relationships between access to social welfare (legal) advice, and the connectedness, equality, and well-being of four case-study communities. Social welfare (legal) advice is advice about people’s rights and entitlements in areas that affect their daily lives such as benefits, debt, housing, social care, and immigration. All areas where the recent “cost of living crisis” has exacerbated people’s need for advice. 

We know that communities can be defined in many ways, and at the outset we have taken a geographical approach in this context, focusing on local authority, town council or London Borough areas: Anglesey (North Wales), Rochdale (Greater Manchester), Hackney (London borough), and Dartmouth (South Hams). There will be many different communities within these geographical areas, based on smaller locations (like villages and council wards, or even streets), but also anchored in characteristics such as faith, ethnicity, nationality, age, and disability. We took the larger geographical areas as a starting point because we wanted to first understand the perspectives of those providing advice to communities, which includes formal, well-established organisations whose services are commissioned by and/or funded by the relevant councils, as well as smaller, voluntary organisations that also tend to be networked at a council area level. Later in our research we will be working closely with community residents in particular wards and villages.

We chose to work with communities on Anglesey, and in Rochdale, Hackney and Dartmouth, because these areas’ characteristics are very different on some measures, and their community advice needs are likely to be high, but also quite diverse. We now turn to providing some background information for each area, some of which is drawn from the Office for National Statistics (ONS), Welsh Government, local council data, and Onward’s UK Social Fabric Index.  

Anglesey (Ynys Môn)

Anglesey can be classified as a rural area with a population of approx. 70,000. People here are comparatively older and overwhelmingly White, with many people moving to the area upon retirement. On some measures, Anglesey scores comparatively poorly for physical infrastructure, economic value, and civil institutions, but on the whole the population fairs more favourably on well-being measures such as feelings of having a worthwhile life, happiness, life satisfaction, comparative levels of anxiety, positive social norms and relationships. Approx. 67% of the population of Anglesey speak Welsh, but rates vary in different areas. For example, over 80% of the population of Llangefni (home to the principal Council offices) speak Welsh, whereas the figure is approx. 45% for the port of Holyhead (which falls within the top 10% of the most deprived areas in Wales). Anglesey has more recently seen a decline in Welsh speakers, this is likely due to a range of social changes, such as an influx of inward migration and outflux of young people seeking better employment prospects. We are particularly interested in having a case-study based in Wales because, whilst state funded legal aid for advice services is not devolved to Wales, Welsh Government is active in justice policy development and the delivery of social welfare advice. The Welsh Government approach has been to establish and support distinct advice networks.

Dartmouth 

Dartmouth also has a comparatively older and White British Community with a population of approx. 5,000. Dartmouth is an attractive coastal location for the wealthy, including second homeowners, with expensive waterfront properties. However, there is a tale of two towns (perhaps two communities), of visible affluence and hidden poverty. For example, whilst approx. 24% of children in the South Hams Borough live in poverty, the rate for the Dartmouth Townstal ward (population approx. 2,600) (on which we focus) is approx. 35%. The Townstal estate is some distance from the lower town (where various support services are based, and which can therefore be difficult to access). Most public services, particularly health services, are no longer local, and travel to Totnes, Newton Abbot, Torbay, Plymouth, or Exeter is required. Local people are increasingly unable to afford buying a house with earnings not keeping pace with price rises. In terms of deprivation, the Lower Super Output Area (LSOA) (a population measure) that includes Townstal has a ranking of 9,296 on the Index of Multiple Deprivation, compared to 29,224 for the waterfront area (where 1 is most deprived and 32,844 is least deprived). In terms of other services/organisations, there are local charities trying to address need, and in particular the TQ6 Community Partnership of local people, grassroots organisations and statutory services working together to tackle local deprivation and community concerns to improve life in Dartmouth, Townstal and the surrounding villages.

London Borough of Hackney

Hackney is a diverse inner-city borough located in East London, just outside the boundaries of the old City of London. Its location and the home to industry’s reliant on cheap and plentiful labour (such as the clothing trade) has made it an attractive place to settle for newly arrived communities. In the 2011 Census, just under 40% of the respondents in Hackney were born outside the UK. As a result, it has experienced some social churn as the new communities replace the more established communities who move on to the leafier outer London Boroughs. It is a densely populated area characterised by blocks of low-rise flats and houses in multiple occupation and has a population of 281,740. 15.2% of households in Hackney were defined as overcrowded in the 2011 Census. Nearly two thirds (64%) of the resident population self-describe as either Asian, Black, Mixed Race or Other heritage with the older parts of the population more likely to self-describe as White. Despite the proximity to the City of London, Hackney has some of the highest rates of deprivation in comparison to other London Boroughs, and in comparison to the whole UK.  Of the London Boroughs, Hackney has the highest proportion of LSOAs within the most deprived 10% nationally (11% of its LSOAs). The levels of child poverty are particularly high as all housing is very expensive so taking housing costs into account, 48% of children in Hackney live in households facing poverty. The area has experienced successive waves of regeneration, most recently on the back of the high land costs in London. High levels of poverty sit beside the evidence of swift and extensive gentrification, making the area somewhat of a social and economic crossroads, with inevitable impacts on people’s sense of community.

Rochdale

Rochdale is a town and metropolitan borough in Greater Manchester and has a population of 223,700; 82% of the population identifying as White, with the next largest group being Asian, at 15%. Rochdale town centre and parts of the neighbouring estates are among the most deprived places in England. Among the Greater Manchester authorities, Rochdale has the highest proportion of LSOAs within the most deprived 10% nationally. Across Rochdale, and after considering housing costs, 36% of children live in poverty, a figure rising to as high as 50% in some wards. On social fabric measures, Rochdale scores the lowest out of all our case-study areas. Rochdale Borough Council has recently conducted a review of social welfare rights advice (social welfare (legal) advice in our project terminology) locally, and is developing and implementing a new model of advice services provision. An Economic Support Network was set up in 2020, facilitated by Action Together Rochdale, the third sector development agency for Rochdale, to facilitate collaborative work between community, voluntary, faith and social enterprise sector organisations, to help support people on issues surrounding money, benefits, financial hardship and support needs, and/or skills relating to volunteering and employment.  

Next in the series… the next posts in our series explore some of our preliminary findings from across North Wales and Anglesey…