The Pension Power for You Helpline evaluation: a summary of findings
A hard copy of this report summary can be obtained by contacting Paul Noakes [E-Mail: Paul.Noakes@dwp.gsi.gov.uk] or by writing to him at the 'Social Research Division, Department for Work and Pensions, 4th Floor, Adelphi, 1-11 John Adam Street, London WC2N 6HT'.
Research Report No. 121
By Karen Bunt, Lorna Adams and David Vivian
This summary presents findings from a three-stage programme of research by IFF Research Ltd. to evaluate the “Pension Power for You” Helpline, which ran in July and August 1999 and was organised by the Trades Union Congress. DSS Research Report No. 121 examines the first two stages of the research – analyses of call monitoring data and information provided to callers; a telephone survey of 1,000 callers three to six weeks after contacting the Helpline; and interviews with staff. DSS In-house Report 70 presents findings from the third stage of the research - follow-up interviews with 500 callers four to six months after their first Helpline contact examining any longer-term impact on pensions decisions.
Overall, callers saw the Helpline as an effective way of providing help and advice on pensions issues:
- it was able to handle a wide range of queries;
- it was successful in reaching some groups of people who were less well informed about pensions issues. It was less likely to be used by groups with low pension cover such as young people (those aged between 18 to 30 years), women, ethnic minorities and manual workers;
- while the Helpline resolved relatively few callers' queries outright, reflecting the general nature of the help and information provided, in most cases it was able to advance queries by providing appropriate information and/or referring callers to other organisations;
- a majority of callers (70 per cent) had acted on the help and guidance provided by the time they were followed up for the third stage of the research, three to six months after contacting the Helpline. Five per cent had joined an occupational pension scheme or had taken out a personal pension as a result of contacting the Helpline;
- callers expressed high levels of satisfaction with the service they received. 80 per cent of callers interviewed at the second stage rated the service as 'very' or 'fairly' good. There was little change in this measure when callers were followed up for the third stage of the research;
- there was widespread support for a permanent Helpline, similar to the “Pension Power for You” service, from callers followed up at the third stage of the research. Nearly all (96 per cent) were in favour and most (83 per cent) believed that such a service should be operated by an independent, impartial public body.
Background and objectives
The “Pension Power for You ”Helpline ran for six weeks from 5th July through to 13th August 1999. The initiative was organised by the Trades Union Congress (TUC) in partnership with the Department of Social Security (DSS), the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), the Financial Services Authority (FSA), the Occupational Pensions Regulatory Authority (Opra), Unity Financial Services and other organisations. In June 1999 IFF Research Ltd was commissioned by the Department of Social Security to undertake an evaluation of the Helpline.
The overall objectives of the evaluation were to:
- examine use of the Helpline.
- evaluate the delivery and effectiveness of the Helpline as a method of providing help and information on pensions issues.
- inform the development and operation of other pensions and financial advice helplines.
Methodology
The evaluation was conducted in three stages.
Stage 1 examined the number and type of callers handled by the Helpline during its six weeks of operation using statistics recorded by the automated call handling service and callsheets completed by the Helpline staff.
Stage 2 involved a telephone survey of 1,029 people three to six weeks after contact with the Helpline to examine their experiences of using the Helpline and actions taken as a result of the help and information provided. Three main types of caller were covered in these interviews:
- people who had left a message requesting a basic information pack;
- people who had got through to speak to an expert; and
- people who had left a message requesting that an expert call them back.
Face to face, in-depth interviews were also conducted with some of the pension experts who staffed the Helpline at the call centre based at the TUC.
Stage 3 involved follow-up telephone interviews with a subset of 500 callers interviewed at Stage 2 four to six months after their contact with the Helpline to examine any longer term impact of the Helpline on pensions decisions. (Callers who had decided not to take any action on their pension query at Stage 2 were excluded from this final stage as were those who declined to be re-interviewed.)
In considering the findings of this research it should be borne in mind that the pilot Helpline only ran for six weeks and the expert call centre was set up on a temporary basis. It therefore had no access to computers or computerised systems to assist with answering calls or recording information about the calls received. Consideration was given to targeting particular groups with poor pension coverage, such as young people and ethnic minorities but, given the temporary nature of the Helpline and limited resources, it was decided that this was not practicable.
Main findings from Stage 1 (DSS Research Report No.121)
Call volumes
Over the six weeks of its operation, the Helpline received 23,883 calls. This figure represents the total number of calls to the Helpline rather than unique callers.
An estimated 70 per cent of calls resulted in the caller either speaking to a pensions expert, or leaving a message for an expert to call them back or requesting a basic information pack. The volume of calls each week varied significantly and was closely related to levels of publicity about the Helpline.
Characteristics of callers
Callers to the Helpline were older than the UK population as a whole. Fifty six per cent of the callers were aged between 50 and 64 years old. By contrast, only four per cent of callers were under 30 years old (both these age groups account for 21 per cent of the UK population).
Women and ethnic minorities were slightly under-represented among the Helpline callers interviewed, accounting for 45 per cent and three per cent respectively of callers (compared with 51 per cent and six per cent of the UK population).
Twenty-five per cent of callers were already drawing a pension. Of those under state pension age, 60 per cent were members of an occupational pension scheme or had a personal pension plan. Ten per cent were below state pension age and currently had no non-state pension provision.
A significant proportion of callers to the Helpline (42 per cent) said that they had 'little' or only a 'patchy' knowledge of pension issues.
Type of enquiry
Callers contacted the Helpline with queries on a wide range of pensions-related issues. The most common types of query from callers who spoke to an expert concerned state pensions (35 per cent asked about the basic state pension and 26 per cent about the State Earnings Related Pension (SERPS)), occupational pension schemes (29 per cent) and personal pensions (22 per cent). Callers who only requested a basic information pack were more likely than others to have a general query, for example, about the adequacy of their current provision.
Women, older people, manual workers and those who were not working were more likely than other groups to make enquires about entitlement to the basic state pension. Male callers and non-manual workers were more likely to enquire about occupational and personal pensions. This reflects current membership of non-state provision. Calls from younger people were more likely to be about general pension issues such as the adequacy of their current provision or how to improve their pension provision.
Information, referrals and literature provided
Over four-fifths (84 per cent) of callers who spoke to a pensions expert were given information regarding their query over the telephone. In addition, over half (52 per cent) were referred to another organisation and 65 per cent were sent more information relevant to their enquiry and/or a basic information pack.
Those callers who did not speak to a pensions expert but left a message requesting a basic information pack were sent the DSS leaflet 'Don't leave your pension to chance' (PM1) and the joint “Pension Power for You ”leaflet.
Main findings from Stage 2 (DSS Research Report No.121)
Helpline publicity and operation
The majority of callers had heard about the Helpline through the national and regional press.
The publicity had conveyed the intended messages about the Helpline, with most people recognising that it was aimed at everyone (78 per cent) and operated by the TUC, DSS or the Government (71 per cent), rather than a pension company or other interested party. Sixty seven per cent also correctly recalled that it was staffed between 9am and 6pm Monday to Friday. These hours were sufficient for many callers, but those working full-time were much more likely than others to feel it should be staffed at other times, particularly weekday evenings, and, to a lesser extent, Saturdays.
Information, referrals and literature provided
The majority of those interviewed who remembered being referred to other organisations had either already contacted them by the time of the interview (44 per cent) or said they were likely to do so (35 per cent). Most of those (80 per cent) who had followed up the referral felt they had been sent to the right organisation.
Most (78 per cent) of those who had received literature in the post, had read some or all of it by the time of the interview. The vast majority (96 per cent) found it easy to understand with only three per cent encountering any difficulty. Sixty five per cent of those who received literature felt it would be useful to them in resolving their pension query.
Satisfaction with the Helpline
Overall, the majority (80 per cent) of callers who were interviewed were satisfied with the service they received. Almost half (48 per cent) rated it as 'very good' and 32 per cent as 'fairly good'. Reflecting these high levels of satisfaction, the majority of callers said they would use this or a similar service again (83 per cent) and would recommend it to someone else (87 per cent, of whom 19 per cent had already done so). In particular, callers felt that the pension experts were polite, helpful, well informed and willing to spend a lot of time answering their queries. However, one in five (21 per cent) callers did not feel it was easy to get through to the Helpline and just under three in ten (29 per cent) felt the help and information obtained was too general to be useful.
The nine per cent of callers who felt the service they received was 'poor' were more likely to have only requested the basic information pack, or had spoken to an expert but had difficulty getting through to the Helpline. These callers were also less likely to have been given a referral or sent information in the post, suggesting that their query may have been too specific or unusual to have benefited from this type of Helpline.
Sixty-eight per cent of all callers interviewed felt the service had been useful to them in helping to resolve their query. Only 25 per cent felt the Helpline to have been 'little' or 'no' use in this respect. Those who only requested a basic information pack were more likely to feel this (38 per cent) than other groups.
Actions taken by callers
Forty-five per cent of callers interviewed had taken further steps since calling the Helpline three to six weeks earlier. They were most likely to have investigated occupational or personal pensions (13 per cent) or to have requested a state pension forecast (6 per cent). Eight per cent of callers said their query was fully resolved and there was no need to take further action. Forty-seven per cent of the callers interviewed had not yet done anything since calling the Helpline. But over half (55 per cent) of this group said they were likely to do something as a result of the information or help received from the Helpline. Thirty-one per cent (representing 15 per cent of all callers interviewed) said they would not take further steps.
Awareness and use of other sources of pensions advice
Most callers (84 per cent) were aware of other sources of advice and information on pension issues and 60 per cent had used one or more of these sources in the past. However one in six callers (16 per cent) were not aware of any other sources.
Views of pensions experts
Overall the pensions experts interviewed who staffed the Helpline found the experience satisfying and rewarding. Generally, they were also satisfied with the way the Helpline operated and the help and information they were able to provide to callers.
The pensions experts felt they were able to handle most types of query effectively. Those that were more difficult to handle, at least initially and where they would have benefited from additional training, mainly related to state benefits and entitlements. Most of the pensions experts were from the private sector and therefore felt less knowledgeable about state pensions.
The pensions experts also felt that some callers had unrealistic expectations of what this type of general Helpline could provide.
Main findings from Stage 3 (DSS In-house report 70)
Further progress with referrals and literature provided
Between the second and third stages of the research callers had continued to follow up referrals they were given and to read the literature they were sent.
The Helpline literature appeared to have some longer–term value for respondents. Of those who received literature, over three-quarters (77 per cent) had kept it and a third (32 per cent) had referred to it again since first reading it.
As well as offering direct guidance, the Helpline service was able to provide callers with sufficient direction to enable them to continue to research their query on their own. Since calling the Helpline, a third (31 per cent) of callers had been in contact with organisations other than those they were referred to and a fifth (21 per cent) had obtained literature about pensions from other sources
Action taken by callers
Seven out of ten callers interviewed at Stage 3 had taken some action as a direct result of calling the Helpline. Those who had direct contact with an expert (rather than just leaving a message requesting a basic information pack) were more likely to have taken action – 74 per cent compared with 56 per cent of those receiving just a basic information pack.
Callers who said (at Stage 2) they were not going to take any action as a result of calling the Helpline were not followed up at Stage 3. Taking this into account, we estimate that overall 60 per cent of callers had taken some further action as a result of calling the Helpline.
Of particular interest are the callers who made changes to their pension status as a result of their contact with the Helpline. A quarter (25 per cent) of callers interviewed at Stage 3 had joined or investigated joining either an occupational pension scheme or a personal pension. In addition, four per cent of callers had elected to increase the contributions they were making to their current pension plan or were investigating whether they needed to do so.
Of those who had taken further action, 38 per cent said they would have been unable to pursue their enquiry without the assistance of the Helpline and nearly two thirds (62 per cent) felt that contacting the Helpline had encouraged them to take action more quickly than they might otherwise have done.
Satisfaction with the Helpline
Callers' overall satisfaction with the Helpline and their views of its usefulness were high and there was little change on either of these measures since Stage 2. This high level of satisfaction reflects the high proportion of callers who had been able to resolve, or at least pursue, their enquiry as a result of the help and information provided by the Helpline.
The need for a permanent Helpline
Finally, callers were asked whether they felt there was a need for a Helpline similar to the “Pension Power For You” service to be set up on a permanent basis. Nearly all (96 per cent) believed that there was. This partly reflected a personal need, given the high proportion who would be likely to use such a service again themselves, but also a view that the general public are not sufficiently aware of the need to make adequate provision for their retirement and that the issues involved can be very confusing. Most callers (83 per cent) believed that such a service should be operated by an independent (impartial) public body.
Conclusions
The results of the evaluation indicate that this type of Helpline is an effective way of providing help and information on pension issues:
- it was able to handle a wide range of queries;
- it was successful in reaching people who were less well informed about pensions issues. However it was less successful at reaching some groups with low pension cover such as young people, ethnic minorities and manual workers;
- reflecting the general nature of the help and information provided, the Helpline resolved relatively few callers' queries outright, but in most cases was able to progress their query by providing appropriate information and/or referring callers to other organisations;
- a high proportion of callers (70 per cent) had acted on the help and guidance they had received by the time they were followed up for the third stage four to six months after contacting the Helpline. This resulted in a change in pension status for a small but not insignificant proportion of these callers;
- satisfaction with the level of service provided by the Helpline was high. 80 per cent of callers interviewed at the second stage rated the service as 'very' or 'fairly' good. There was little change in this measure among callers who were followed-up at the third stage.
- callers would value a service of this kind being established on a permanent basis as evidenced by the high proportion of callers who would use such a service again. Nearly all (96 per cent) of callers who were interviewed at Stage 3 were in favour and 82 per cent said that they were 'very' or 'fairly' likely to use such a service. Most callers (83 per cent) believed that an independent, impartial public body should operate such a service.
Implications for the development of future helplines
One of the objectives of the evaluation of this pilot Helpline was to provide pointers for the development of similar helplines. The following suggestions are based on the findings from this study:
- if future Helplines are aimed at groups with poor pension coverage such as young people, ethnic minorities and manual workers publicity needs to be targeted more specifically towards these groups;
- if the level of calls is to be sustained, publicity campaigns will need to run until awareness of the service is well established;
- publicity will need to manage expectations of the level of assistance the Helpline provides. In particular to stress the general nature of the Helpline, that it can answer a wide range of queries on pension issues, but cannot provide detailed answers to individuals' specific queries;
- extend the hours the Helpline is staffed to cover evenings and possibly Saturdays to cater better for people working full-time;
- if information on calls is to be collected for monitoring purposes, the system should be computerised and staff trained to use it;
- a computerised system would also facilitate the handling of requests for callbacks, if this facility is to be offered. Evidence from this research suggests a link between the length of time taken to re-contact callers and satisfaction with the service provided;
- it is important to despatch written information promptly. Whilst the majority of callers received the promised literature promptly, not having received the literature from the Helpline was one of the reasons callers had not yet taken any further action to resolve their pension query;
- in determining staffing levels the average duration of calls and the peaks and troughs need to be taken into account;
- many of the experts recruited were financial advisers or experts in the pensions field. Additional training would enable them to handle a wider range of pension queries, in particular on state benefits and also less common queries such as pensions and divorce. Training should also cover the legislative and regulatory frameworks and recent changes to these;
- On the basis of the evaluation findings, the number of queries requiring specialist knowledge was not sufficient to warrant having one or more specialists on particular pension issues on the staff of this or similar Helplines.
Publication details
Bunt, K., Adams, L. and Vivian, D. (2000) “Evaluation of the Pension Power for You Helpline”, DSS Research Report No. 121, Leeds: CDS
Bunt, K., Adams, L. and Vivian, D. (2000) “The Pension Power for You Helpline: Final Report”, In-house report 70, London: DSS
Other relevant publications on pension provision
Bunt, K., Adams, L. and Vivian, D. (1999) “Callers to the Pension Power for You Helpline: An interim report”, In-house report 56, London: DSS
Bone, M., Gregory, J., Gill, B. and Lader D. (1992) “Retirement and Retirement Plans”, OPCS Social Survey Division, London: HMSO
Disney, R., Grundy, E. and Johnson, P. (1997) “The Dynamics of Retirement”, DSS Research Report No 72, London: TSO
Field J. and Prior G. (1996) “Women and Pensions”, DSS Research Report No. 49, London: HMSO
Hawkes, C. and Garman A. (1995) “Perceptions of Non State Pensions, ”In-house report 8, London: DSS
Hedges, A. (1998) “Pensions and Retirement Planning”, DSS Research Report No. 83, Leeds: CDS
Knight, G. and McKay, S. (2000) “Lifetime Experiences of Self-employment,” DSS Research Report No. 120, Leeds: CDS
McKay, S., Heaver, C. and Walker, R. (2000) “Building Up Pension Rights”, DSS Research Report No. 114, Leeds: CDS
Thomas, A, Pettigrew, N. and Tovey, P. (1999) “Increasing Compulsory Pension Provision: Attitudes of the General Public and the Self-employed”, In-house report 48, London: DSS