Description of the programme

The Money Guiders programme aims to improve the quality of money guidance delivered across the UK. This programme pilot targeted public benefit organisations covering a wide range of sectors. 101 pilot partners and 1900 practitioners registered for the pilot which tested four core programme components: Money guidance competency framework; Partner engagement; Learning Hub; UK Money Guider Network.

The study

The evaluation was commissioned by The Money and Pension Service to understand who the pilot reached and how effectively the programme components worked to achieve its aims. It sought to understand needs, motivations and barriers to participation and explored ways to improve user experience.

The evaluation ran from March 2021 – October 2021 and employed a mixed-method theory-based approach, which included:

• 15 Pilot partner deep dives involving depth interviews with managers and practitioners within pilot partner organisations
• 13 practitioner depth interviews
• Observation of 6 network events
• Practitioner and Partner surveys
• Analysis of management data from the Learning Hub, Money Guider Networks and MaPS website

Evaluation findings were based on triangulation of evidence from these sources. In addition to the published summary report, the evaluators produced a repository of more detailed process learnings to inform ongoing development of the programme.

Key findings

Pilot partners were motivated to join the pilot to gain recognition for their services, expand their offer and upskill staff. The main reasons practitioners wanted to engage were to build confidence, provide better support and gain recognition for their skills.

Most practitioners found the pilot valuable (78%) and would recommend to others (78%). Engagement mainly affected practitioners’ knowledge, confidence and motivation. Fewer survey respondents agreed that the programme had positively affected their sense of being part of a money guidance community, but this likely reflects low engagement with the Networks amongst evaluation participants.

The Networks were the least well-known component and understanding of the Networks (e.g. purpose, who they’re for, what to expect) was patchy. For practitioners who had attended a Network event, 69% agreed they felt more ‘part of a community’ as a result of engaging with the pilot, versus 44% of non-attendees.

Two-thirds of survey respondents had used the Competency Framework to map competencies and service delivery, and to identify gaps in knowledge, services and training. The Mapping and Development tools (designed to help practitioners use the Competency Framework) were supported in principle, but in practice, poor usability was a barrier to engagement.

The Learning Hub was the most widely used programme component and was considered the central element of the programme by many.

The City & Guilds Endorsed Digital Credential was a big draw for practitioners and pilot partner organisations, who valued the opportunity to gain credibility and build practitioners’ CVs.

Points to consider

• Outcomes evidence should be treated as indicative as the evaluation approach does not allow for conclusive attribution of outcomes to the programme.
  • Due to low response rates to the practitioner survey and low engagement with the evaluation by practitioners who attended network events, the findings may not reflect the full range of views of people who engaged with the pilot.
• This research is primarily of use to those working in the UK.
• This report is applicable to funders and providers of money guidance, and anyone with an interest in improving the quality of guidance services.