We asked, you said, we did

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) undertook an engagement exercise to understand user needs regarding the provision of an additional international net migration estimate that excludes students.  A survey ran from 10 January 2025 to 28 February 2025. We also held online focus groups with users and topic experts. This allowed us to gather feedback on the three proposed options and to identify any user needs for this additional estimate of international net migration.  
 
International students who stay in the UK for 12 months or more meet the United Nations definition of a long-term international migrant and we therefore include them in international net migration estimates. We are aware of potential stakeholder interest in an additional estimate—based on a definition that does not include international students—and therefore sought feedback on relevant user needs. We undertook this exercise to explore options, and to see if there were any specific areas of research or policy which may benefit from an additional estimate of international net migration.  For further details, please see our full response summary document.
 
The three options were presented to respondents along with strengths and limitations of each. The options are outlined below.  

• Option 1: Maintain the current approach.  
• Option 2: Produce an additional estimate of international net migration excluding students using existing published estimates by reason for migration. 
• Option 3: Additional, alternative estimate of international net migration using visa information to exclude students. 

We appreciate the time respondents took to share their views and would like to thank them for taking part in the engagement exercise. Their feedback continues to shape our work. We will keep users informed of our plans to develop migration estimates. 

The survey received 43 responses from a range of stakeholders. These consisted of: 

• 22 responses from individuals 

• 12 responses from academia, charities, and other groups 

• 6 responses from other government departments 

• 3 responses from local authorities in England and Wales 

There was an overall preference for not introducing an additional international migration estimate. Our users raised a number of concerns, including potential for multiple estimates based on different definitions to create confusion and that any change may be perceived as a political decision that could reduce trust in official migration statistics.

While some users identified potential benefits of additional information on student migration being made available, an additional estimate of net international migration excluding students was not viewed as a user priority. However, there was support for other additional analysis being provided where possible.

Following the outcome of this stakeholder engagement a decision has been made not to publish an additional estimate of international net migration excluding students at this time. 

We will continue to develop additional analysis relating to both students and other migrant groups and review how we can make it easier for our users to understand what statistics are available.

We will also review the suggestions provided by users through this consultation exercise and look for opportunities to take them forward as part of our ongoing research and development work.

Following on from the National Statistician’s Independent Review of the Measurement of Public Services Productivity, we are looking at how the ONS’s publications on public service productivity can be more coherent. This includes how they can fit better with other productivity publications, given user interest in being able to compare with whole economy and market sector productivity.   

Between 8 January and 19 February 2025, we ran a survey to gather feedback from users on ONS’s public service productivity publications. This survey enabled us to gather insights on how the publications are used, which aspects are most important to users, and where improvements could be made.  

We received 24 responses to the survey which consisted of: 

• 12 responses from central and devolved governments 

• 4 responses from think tanks and academia 

• 2 responses from local government 

• 2 responses from arm’s length bodies and other public sector organisations 

• 1 response from an individual 

• 3 responses with no sector specified 

The respondents most commonly use ONS’s public service productivity publications for work purposes, but the publications are also used for personal use. Ways in which the publications are used include: 

• to inform policy development and analysis 

• to inform academic analysis 

• to understand broad trends and provide context to the feasibility of future productivity plans  

• to try to understand potential ways to improve productivity 

• to form a view as a taxpayer on whether public services are effective and efficient 

The survey indicated that there is generally a good level of satisfaction with the public service productivity publications, but respondents did make some suggestions as to how satisfaction could be improved.  

Most respondents were moderately to fairly confident that they understand the differences between the public service productivity publications and know which publications meet their needs. However, some respondents were somewhat unsure or very unsure about the differences between the publications and which meets their needs. 

Some respondents said they find it difficult or very difficult to find what they are looking for in the publications. Most of these reported either reading the whole article or scrolling through until they find what they are looking for. The survey also highlighted that the publications are generally easily understood, but there is scope to improve ease of understanding. 

Although more respondents were interested in overall productivity than the individual elements (inputs, output and quality adjusted output), the majority of respondents were interested in all elements of productivity. Service area breakdowns are more important to respondents than timely estimates and quality adjusted output; long term trends are the least important. 

The majority of respondents were also interested in other types of productivity, but only around half were aware of the ONS’s other productivity publications, such as Annual multi-factor productivity, market sector, UK.  Although the majority of respondents are moderately to very confident that they understand the differences between public service productivity and other productivity measures, some respondents are unsure about the differences.  

The survey has highlighted that the key areas of focus for improvement should be: 

• understanding of differences between the different public service productivity publications 

• better navigation and making it easier for people to find what they’re looking for 

• ease of understanding 

• clearer links to other ONS productivity publications 

We will use the findings from the survey to inform follow-up discussions with some users to explore the themes identified in more detail. This more in-depth engagement will enable us to identify specific improvements that can be implemented to optimise the purpose of each publication and the relationships between them, to improve the clarity of the overall narrative.  

We will also consider how work to improve the user experience on the ONS website could help to address some of the issues identified during our user engagement. We aim to implement some initial changes into our quarterly public service productivity publication in autumn 2025, with further changes made for our next annual publication in spring 2026.   

We would like to thank everyone who took part in the survey and provided us with valuable feedback that will guide improvements to the public service productivity publications.  

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) undertook a user engagement exercise to collect feedback on the redevelopment of domestic abuse statistics for the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW). This took place between 3 December 2024 and 5 January 2025 and was the final part of wider engagement with stakeholders to seek views on our redevelopment proposals. A user feedback survey was published alongside Redevelopment of domestic abuse statistics: research update December 2024 which detailed our extensive analysis and trial outputs.  

This update provides information on feedback on the following.

• Content of the new domestic abuse survey questions.
• Estimates produced from the new questions.
• Methodology used to produce the estimates.
• Supporting information on the estimates.
• Trial domestic abuse outputs.

For more information, please see the overview section of this user survey page, below.

We received a total of 14 responses from a variety of stakeholders.They covered the relevant sectors and the key users of this data. We also engaged more widely in the preceding work to formulate our changes.

Below is a table that shows a breakdown of the types of users who replied.   

Table 1: Respondent count by sector   

Survey respondents provided us with a substantial amount of useful feedback. Users told us that they used our domestic abuse statistics and data for academic research, improving policy or processes, and planning service provision.

The survey findings showed that over three-quarters (77%) of users thought we should replace the existing CSEW domestic abuse questions with the new domestic abuse questions (PDF, 471KB) we had been trialling on the survey since April 2023.

We asked users to what extent they agreed with the statement:

“The new domestic abuse questions accurately capture the lived experiences of domestic abuse victims.”

Of the 13 responses to this question, 54% of respondents either “agreed” or “strongly agreed”, 8% “neither agreed or disagreed” and 39% “disagreed” or “strongly disagreed”.

When asked whether they thought some abuse types were missing from the questions, half of users felt there were, with the other half feeling the questions captured all types. In addition, specific requests were made for:

• broader questions on technology-facilitated abuse
• questions specifically identifying faith-based abuse
• questions on child victims witnessing domestic abuse

4 in 5 users (82%) found it “very easy” or “quite easy” to access the trial outputs, while the remaining 18% found it “neither easy nor difficult”.

More information on the user survey responses can be found in our Redevelopment of domestic abuse statistics: research update May 2025 article.

We used the survey findings as a component of our evaluation of the new questions along with the substantial cognitive testing, previous user feedback and data analysis outlined in our Evaluating a new measure of domestic abuse article. With all of this information we have decided to change to using the new survey questions on the Crime Survey for England and Wales to measure domestic abuse from April 2025.

This means that, from April 2025, our official statistics on domestic abuse will be derived from the new domestic abuse questions. In addition, the estimates published in Section 3 of our Redevelopment of domestic abuse statistics: research update December 2024 article should now be treated as official statistics.

We are extremely grateful to everyone involved in the redevelopment of the domestic abuse survey questions. We look forward to future engagement to help shape the new domestic abuse outputs, as we continue to develop them following the permanent inclusion of the new questions.

The UK Statistics Assembly brings together users, producers and stakeholders, to discuss and advise on the UK’s statistical priorities and user needs.   

It's important that the Assembly is informed by a variety of perspectives from across the statistics system.  

To ensure that the Assembly design and planning reflects a range of external views and benefited from their advice, experience and independence, an Assembly Delivery Group was established. Organisations represented on the group are: 

• Academy of Social Sciences  

• British Chambers of Commerce  

• Government Statistical Service  

• Joseph Rowntree Foundation  

• National Statistician's Expert User Advisory Committee representatives 

• Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency 

• Office for Statistics Regulation  

• Royal Statistical Society  

• Scottish Government 

• UK Research and Innovation 

• UK Statistics Authority 

• Welsh Government 

• Westmorland and Furness Council 

The Office for National Statistics provides the secretariat for the group. 

Ahead of the Assembly event on 22 January 2025, we held a call for contributions which ran for eight weeks between September and November 2024. This took the form of a short questionnaire. It asked for:  

• topic and cross-cutting theme discussion preferences  

• suggestions for agenda discussion items and presenters 

• examples of statistical and data priorities, gaps, and public and user needs

Who we heard from  

We were pleased to receive a wide range of quality contributions from a broad set of organisations and individuals. 

Some organisations submitted several contributions. We have broken down the number of organisations or individuals who submitted a contribution by sector, as follows.  

What we heard 

We asked contributors to indicate the top three topics and cross-cutting themes they would like discussed at the Assembly. The following lists are from most preferred to least preferred. 

Statistical topics in order of preference. 

• Economy and growth 

• Equalities 

• Health and social care 

• Population 

• Education, training and skills 

• Cost of living, poverty and prices 

• Employment 

• Environment and nature 

• Well-being 

• Business, trade and industry 

• Net zero 

• Family and community 

• Crime, justice and law 

• Migration 

• Transport 

• Housing 

• Skills 

• Agriculture and farming 

• Energy 

• Defence and armed forces 

 

Cross-cutting themes in order of preference. 

• Data linkage and integration 

• Regional and local 

• Data innovation and artificial intelligence 

• Communications and engagement 

• Quality 

• Methodology 

• Data ethics and privacy 

• Code of Practice for Statistics application beyond government 

• Code of Practice for Statistics revisions 

• International 

Contributors also described the topics and themes they felt most important to discuss at the Assembly, indicating their priorities, gaps and evidence of unmet user needs. The detailed qualitative feedback and evidence we received introduced some additional topics and preferences.  

In collaboration with the Assembly Delivery Group, we used the call for contribution submissions to develop a comprehensive, interactive agenda. It is designed based on the indicated preferences, as well as the detailed qualitative evidence from the call for contributions and further feedback. The agenda consists of 15 distinct discussion sessions, in three concurrent blocks of five, covering a range of statistical topics (such as health and economic statistics) and cross-cutting themes (such as data linkage and coherence). To facilitate attendee participation, each session is framed by a question. 

You can see the full Assembly agenda on the UK Statistics Authority website.

We thank everyone who contributed. Due to the high interest in this first Assembly and the broad range of subjects raised in the call for contributions, we could not include all the requests from all submissions on the agenda. All submissions will be shared with the National Statistician’s Expert User Advisory Committee for their report to the UK Statistics Authority Board. 

Between 6 August and 23 October 2024, we engaged with users of our consumer price inflation item indices data and price quotes microdataset to better understand how they are used. These datasets are published on the same day as our inflation figures and are supplementary to our consumer price inflation, UK bulletin and reference tables.

With the planned introduction of groceries scanner data, we will no longer be able to publish the item indices data and price quote microdataset in their current forms. Our data-sharing agreements with retailers providing scanner data will lead to the discontinuation of price quote microdata for Divisions 1 and 2 (food and non-alcoholic beverages, and alcohol and tobacco). While the coverage of the analytical microdata will be reduced, the introduction of large scanner datasets will greatly improve the quality of our accredited official inflation statistics.

There may be scope to publish alternative data products which meet the current needs of existing microdata users. To better understand those needs, we ran a short user engagement questionnaire to capture more information about how these data are currently being used.

We received 15 external responses from a variety of users. Below is a table that shows a breakdown of the type of respondents who replied to the questionnaire.

Table 1: Respondent count by sector

All respondents were in analytical roles.

Respondents were also asked to share how they make use of both datasets, as outlined in the below table.

Table 2: Use count of each dataset

For both datasets, the frequency of the data use was split evenly between irregular or occasional usage, and regular monthly or quarterly usage.

Many of the price quote microdataset users indicated that they try and understand how the price quote data have influenced higher-level index movements. This is often in the context of improving inflation forecasting models. Users indicated they wish to understand the extent to which price movements have been influenced by one-off events, compared with broader movements across the price sample. They also indicated interest in the prevalence of discounting across the price sample, as well as making use of other marker codes such as temporary missingness or sample replacements.

A further area of common interest is in understanding regional variation in prices. In some cases, users are seeking to construct higher-level regional aggregates. In other cases, exploratory analysis of the regional data is undertaken.

Some users highlighted that having a long-run, continuous dataset of comparable price quote data is particularly valuable to the wider research community. One user suggested copying the approach used to release census extracts, through a “sample of anonymised records”, drawing a sample in a way which mimics the CPI price collection design.

The item indices dataset is commonly used for the construction of alternative aggregates of inflation data, whether as a cross-check for elementary aggregation from the price quote data, or to supplement special aggregates where the price quote data for a particular item are unavailable.

As detailed in our blog, we will not be introducing scanner data into our consumer price inflation statistics until March 2026. This means that the price quote microdataset will continue to be available in its current form up until this date, with some structural changes resulting from the processing improvements planned for March 2025 (more information will be provided in the Consumer price inflation, UK bulletin published on 19 February 2025).

However, from March 2026, our data sharing agreements with scanner data retailers mean we will have to discontinue the price quote microdataset for Divisions 1 and 2 (food and non-alcoholic beverages, and alcohol and tobacco). Price quote data for the remaining divisions will continue to be available as per the current publication.

The size and structure of the scanner data is intrinsically different to the current data, making them unsuitable for some existing uses. For example, whilst a price quote in the locally collected dataset can be identified as “on-sale”, scanner data unit prices are averaged across three weeks, during which time products may have been both on and off sale at different points of the month.

Nonetheless, the questionnaire responses suggest that there are aggregate statistics that could be produced to meet some of the existing needs of users of the price quote microdataset. Before March 2026, we aim to share example aggregate statistics with users, and would welcome further user feedback about them.

From March 2026, groceries data (Divisions 1 and 2) will continue to be available as part of the item indices dataset. However, the move from sample items to broader, exhaustive “consumption segments” (see the article, Introducing alternative data into consumer price statistics - aggregation and weights) means that, from March 2025, disaggregate groceries indices will have less specific definitions. Changes to the classification structure (as described in the article, Classification of new data in UK consumer price statistics) mean that specific item indices for Divisions 1 and 2 will no longer be calculated as part of the aggregation process. For all other divisions, the consumption segment level will be equivalent to the existing item level, so these indices will continue to be available in their current form.

We would like to thank all of those who took part in the user engagement questionnaire and provided us with invaluable feedback that will guide future changes to the dataset. We intend to provide further opportunities to engage and inform users with updates before March 2026.

If you have any further questions or would like to request additional information, please email cpi@ons.gov.uk.

We undertook a user engagement exercise to better understand user needs for producer price inflation statistics with the aim of refining and rationalising the published outputs. This took place from 20 March to 22 May 2024 and was part of our continuous improvement strategy. 

A summary of the questions asked and the proposed changes to existing outputs presented alongside this exercise can be found in the related documents found attached to the overview section of this webpage. 

Benefits to users 

We believe the actions we are taking to refine, simplify and rationalise our outputs will make them better for our users and us. They will: 

• make our datasets more focused 

• easier to find 

• easier to access 

• easier to produce 

• and free up capacity in our team to develop statistical products to meet new or emerging needs 

We would like to thank all respondents for taking part in the engagement exercise and appreciate the time taken to share their views. 

The exercise received responses from representatives of businesses, industry bodies, central and local government, academia, and individuals responding in a personal capacity. 

The following key comments emerged: 

• improvements to the documentation we provide on Quality and Methodology Information (QMI), including metadata for the proposed new datasets and an understanding of the current index hierarchy 

• improvements to the structure and format of datasets 

• expanded commentary within the monthly statistical bulletin 

• publication of monthly services producer price indices (SPPIs) 

• greater granularity in the published datasets, including publication of item level data and the weights used to aggregate to the 6-digit index level 

The purpose of this engagement exercise was to gain a better understanding of user needs for producer price inflation statistics. This ensures changes made to future publications and accompanying data better meet these needs. 

We have concluded that the new outputs will be an improvement compared with the current datasets and will better meet the needs of most of our users.  

Over the next 6-to-12-month period, we will: 

• begin publication of improved datasets once the proposals have been updated to take account of the feedback received. This will include: 

• merging some of our existing datasets which present the same or similar information 

• reducing the total number of separate datasets 

• removing duplications of information and series 

• removing unnecessary data and information 

• introducing data and information which adds to the quality of our statistical outputs and datasets 

To help users adjust to using the datasets in their new format there will be a transitionary period which will be communicated with users. We will also: 

• publish an updated version of our quality and methodology information (QMI) which will reflect our current methods and strengths, limitations, and appropriate uses of the data we create and publish. We will include metadata for the proposed new datasets and an understanding of the index hierarchy.  
   

• continue to review our data and methods as part of our strategy for continued improvement, consulting users as appropriate. 

We have noted that users want expanded commentary and more regular publication of SPPI data. These are beyond the scope of the current set of changes and improvements we are undertaking. However, we will consider these requests as part of planning for future development work.  

For details of all the feedback received and what we are doing in response, please see our response summary.

This engagement exercise took place during the previous government. We intended to publish a response no later than 12 weeks from the closing of the engagement, however, this response was paused due to the pre-election period of sensitivity.  

We undertook an engagement exercise on user needs from 2022-based national, subnational, and household projections. The engagement exercise ran for six weeks, from 30 January to 12 March 2024, and we held an online webinar on 20 February 2024. The engagement enabled us to gather feedback on users’ output needs from the upcoming projections releases, and to understand what users would like to see in our releases, such as specific variants or new dataset formats.

We conducted this engagement earlier in our production processes than in the past to enable enough time for us to consider and, where possible, meet users’ needs, and to help us prepare for the set of 2022-based projections. For further details, please see our full response summary document.

We would like to thank all respondents for their valuable feedback which will continue to guide our work over the short- and long-term. Some user requests involve longer-term implementation and planning, which we may introduce in a phased approach over time, potentially as part of wider activities within the transformation of population and migration statistics. 

The engagement exercise received 39 responses from a range of stakeholders. These consisted of: 

• 15 responses from local authorities in England 

• 10 responses from other government departments  

• 9 responses from individuals 

• 5 responses from academia, charities and other groups 

The overall feedback on the format of publications showed that users find our accompanying documentation useful, such as statistical bulletins, methodology documents and quality and methodology information (QMI). They were commended for being well-written and designed for a general audience.

It was noted that the articles on methods and assumptions are easy to understand and sufficiently detailed for users to be able to accurately interpret the figures from the projections. These articles also give users the background information needed to make the best use of the projections. However, some users said that they would like to see more technically detailed articles for more experienced and technical users. 

Users highlighted the need for more information about our assumption-setting process and the role of our expert advisory panels. They would also like to see analysis of accuracy and historical changes made around methodology and assumptions used across previous runs of projections. They would like us to provide them with guidance on the appropriate use of our projections and clarify the relationship between mid-year population estimates and admin-based population estimates.  

The engagement has highlighted the need for: 

• a suite of variant projections (broadly similar to those in our 2018-based projections) 

• population projections by ethnic group or country of birth, marital status, disability status, and religious affiliations 

• technically detailed articles on how demographic assumptions were developed, how the projections were produced and the accuracy of past projections releases 

• background information needed to make the best use of the projections 

• population projections for smaller geographic areas 

• a web-based tool enabling users to make customised tables  

For further details, please see our full response summary document. 

We acknowledge the need for guidance on the appropriate use of our projections and their relationship between mid-year estimates and admin-based population estimates. We will publish detailed guidance and updated QMI reports, including information about the strengths and limitations of our projections and their underlying data, and guidance on their appropriate use. 

We have also noted that users would like to see more information around our assumption setting processes and the role of our expert advisory panels. To ensure that the assumption setting process is transparent and well-understood, we plan to continue to make available a summary of the National Population Projections Expert Advisory Panel meeting minutes and membership to users on request. This user feedback highlights the need for us to continue to include information on the evidence to support the assumed future levels of migration, fertility, and mortality and to provide more information on our assumption setting.  

In producing 2022-based projections, we will need to balance and phase the improvements we want to make against the resources we have available. Current work will be focused on the following potential developments: 

• exploring the feasibility of producing a suite of variants requested by our users 

• where possible, reformatting datasets to meet accessibility and machine-readable requirements 

• producing tables of contents or similar release contents files for both subnational population projections and household projections so that our users can find relevant datasets and articles with ease 

• releasing projections data on Nomis in a timely manner and, for the 2022-based national population projections release, we are exploring a new online tool whereby users would be able to select the data (including variant projections) they wish to access 

• analyses of the accuracy, and historical changes made around our methodology and assumptions used across previous projections 

• exploring the feasibility of producing projections based on ethnic group, country of birth and other characteristics 

• exploring the methodological and quality implications of incorporating data from the latest three censuses in the 2022-based household projections 

• feasibility of producing 2022-based household projections broken down by requested household types, such as lone parent households  

Many of the other proposed requests involve longer-term planning and implementation which we will look to introduce over time. For further details, please see our full response summary document. 

We plan to communicate updates through our Population Statistics newsletter, which you can subscribe to on our website. The ONS release calendar contains the latest information on population projections releases and will be updated as we work towards the next releases. 

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) ran our annual stakeholder satisfaction survey from 6 December 2023 to 22 January 2024 to understand users’ and stakeholders’ satisfaction with and use of our statistics.

The survey findings form part of our wider stakeholder engagement programme, and help us to improve our offer, including how we communicate with you. 

We asked users questions on a range of topics, including:

• how they access and use our statistics
• to what extent the statistics meet their needs
• awareness and use of contact and engagement channels, such as newsletters and events
• awareness, use, and satisfaction with three of our core programmes of work: the Integrated Data Service (IDS), the Ambitious, Radical, Inclusive Economics Statistics (ARIES) transformation programme, and ONS Local

We received 715 responses from a variety of respondents. Of these, 460 use our statistics for both personal and professional uses, and 255 use our statistics for personal uses only.

After using our statistics out of personal interest, the most frequent reasons for using our statistics were for “understanding work-related issues” and “supporting policy and decision-making”. From the qualitative feedback, respondents also shared that statistics were being used to understand their local community, to disseminate information to colleagues and stakeholders, and as a means to develop best quality practices in methodology. The most common professional sectors for respondents were local government and business.

Feedback from respondents was broadly positive. We found that 84% agree the ONS is a trustworthy organisation, and 82% agree we produce statistics to a high standard. We also received positive feedback on how well we meet users’ needs on our range of statistical topics, and how we engage with users and stakeholders through our range of channels. 

We received constructive feedback on our range of programmes, including ONS Local, IDS, and ARIES. We also received useful feedback on what we are doing well as an organisation and where we can improve, such as continuing to ensure the ONS website meets user needs, ensuring user-friendliness of our statistical outputs, and doing more to promote our role as an impartial source of official statistics.  

We also received qualitative feedback on additional services or statistical products that would be of most use to users and stakeholders, including the increased use of application programming interfaces (APIs) for accessing data, developing more explainer pieces for lay users, and producing statistics at more localised levels.

The findings from the survey provides us with insight and helps us to continually improve our offer to users and stakeholders. The findings are shared widely across the ONS and have been discussed with individual teams for colleagues to consider as part of their work. We are progressing a series of recommendations as part of our wider stakeholder engagement work for 2024/2025, and the findings will complement these recommendations.

Thank you to all who participated in the survey. Your feedback is invaluable in driving positive change across the ONS, and ensures we continue to put user needs at the forefront of all that we do in serving the public good.

If you would like to discuss the findings of this report with the ONS External Affairs team, or have any questions about this research, please get in touch by email: external.affairs@ons.gov.uk. 

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) ran a consultation from 29 June 2023 to 26 October 2023 on the Future of Population and Migration Statistics in England and Wales. It was designed to provide us with information on how people currently use our population and migration statistics. It also captured user feedback on our proposals for future development of these statistics. For further details, please see our consultation document.

This consultation update details the number of consultation responses by sector and outlines how we engaged with users of population and migration statistics both before and during the consultation. It also explains how we will carry out our analysis of the responses. 

ONS is responsible for producing population statistics for England and Wales. The consultation covers only population and migration statistics produced for England and Wales, and the Welsh Government have been closely involved throughout. We are continuing to work closely with our partners in National Records Scotland and the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency.

We received a total of 706 responses at the close of the consultation. The table below shows how respondents represented themselves based on the categories provided in the consultation questionnaire.

Sector	Count of question “What sector does the organisation belong to?”
Individual response	366
Local government	147
Charity or voluntary	52
Central government	34
Other public body, for example health, transport, or emergency services	31
Business, industry or commercial	21
Academia or research	18
Religion or faith	8
Devolved administration and associated bodies	9
Other*	20
Grand Total	706

*Other includes responses from sectors such as Think Tanks, Journalism or Media; which have been combined to avoid disclosure.

Note - Responses with more than one named author have been included, in this table, as a single response

Users were asked why population statistics are important to them. Broadly, the main reasons included:

• Informing national and local public policy to provide the best strategy and intelligence
• Monitoring trends and changes in communities and populations
• Informing funding and allocation decisions around service provision, to meet the needs of the local communities and societal groups  
• Academic research and detailed analysis in the respective fields of study
• Respondents personal interest in being kept up to date on the analysis of data for issues important to them or their organisation
• A number of responses were from users of population data via Census records for family and social history purposes

Prior to the consultation being launched we undertook targeted engagement to maximise awareness and accessibility of our proposals. This included a series of roundtables across a number of sectors, where we sought feedback on our consultation approach and promoted the importance of engaging with the proposal across these sectors. These roundtables covered a broad range of users, but we were cognizant that these conversations alone may not be representative of the total user base. 

During the formal consultation period, we delivered a sizeable engagement programme to reach as many users as possible. We focused on providing resources to make sure users had access to information to make an informed response to the consultation questionnaire. This was delivered through emails, newsletters, social media, conferences, webinars, meetings and other events. The consultation provided users with a questionnaire to share their feedback on the proposals and how it would meet their needs.

Responses to the consultation will inform a recommendation from the UK Statistics Authority, on the advice of the National Statistician. This recommendation will outline how ONS should produce statistics about the population and migration in the future, based on user need for population and migration statistics. We will publish the outcomes of our analysis in 2024, alongside the recommendation.

The consultation has provided ONS with an opportunity to engage with a wide range of users, representing the diverse population and communities, which we serve as producers of official statistics for England and Wales. However, the conversation and engagement with users does not stop here: user need will continue to be at the heart of what we do moving forward. As we approach the formal recommendation and develop our future research plan, we will continue to build on the engagement we sought throughout the consultation and build in opportunities for further feedback from users.   

We would like to thank all respondents for their valuable feedback, which will continue to guide our work in this area. 

If you would like to get in touch about our future research plan, please email FPMSenquiries@ons.gov.uk

Cynhaliodd y Swyddfa Ystadegau Gwladol (y SYG) ymgynghoriad rhwng 29 Mehefin 2023 a 26 Hydref 2023 ar Ddyfodol Ystadegau am y Boblogaeth a Mudo yng Nghymru a Lloegr. Ei nod oedd rhoi gwybodaeth i ni am y ffordd y mae pobl yn defnyddio ein hystadegau am y boblogaeth a mudo. Roedd hefyd yn casglu adborth gan ddefnyddwyr ar ein cynigion ar gyfer datblygu'r ystadegau hyn yn y dyfodol. Ceir rhagor o fanylion yn ein dogfen ymgynghori.

Mae'r wybodaeth ddiweddaraf am yr ymgynghoriad yn nodi nifer yr ymatebion i'r ymgynghoriad yn ôl sector ac mae'n amlinellu sut y gwnaethom ymgysylltu â defnyddwyr ystadegau am y boblogaeth a mudo cyn ac yn ystod yr ymgynghoriad. Mae hefyd yn esbonio sut y byddwn yn cynnal ein dadansoddiad o'r ymatebion.   

Mae'r wybodaeth ddiweddaraf am yr ymgynghoriad yn nodi pwy a ymatebodd i'r ymgynghoriad ac mae'n amlinellu sut y gwnaethom ymgysylltu â defnyddwyr ystadegau am y boblogaeth a mudo cyn ac yn ystod yr ymgynghoriad. Mae hefyd yn esbonio sut y byddwn yn cynnal ein dadansoddiad o'r ymatebion. 

Mae SYG yn gyfrifol am lunio ystadegau am y boblogaeth ar gyfer Cymru a Lloegr. Dim ond yr ystadegau am y boblogaeth a mudo a luniwyd ar gyfer Cymru a Lloegr y mae'r ymgynghoriad yn eu cwmpasu, a chynhaliwyd cysylltiad agos â Llywodraeth Cymru drwy gydol y broses. Rydym yn parhau i gydweithio'n agos â'n partneriaid yng Nghofnodion Cenedlaethol yr Alban ac Asiantaeth Ystadegau ac Ymchwil Gogledd Iwerddon.

Cawsom gyfanswm o 706 o ymatebion cyn diwedd yr ymgynghoriad. Mae'r tabl isod yn dangos sut y cynrychiolodd ymatebwyr eu hunain yn seiliedig ar y categorïau a roddwyd yn holiadur yr ymgynghoriad.

Sector	Niferoedd ar gyfer y cwestiwn “Pa sector y mae'r sefydliad yn perthyn iddo?”
Ymateb unigolion	366
Llywodraeth leol	147
Elusen neu gorff gwirfoddol	52
Llywodraeth ganolog	34
Corff cyhoeddus arall, er enghraifft iechyd, trafnidiaeth neu wasanaethau brys	31
Busnes, diwydiant neu fasnachol	21
Academaidd neu ymchwil	18
Crefydd neu ffydd	8
Gweinyddiaeth ddatganoledig a chyrff cysylltiedig	9
Arall*	20
Cyfanswm Terfynol	706

*Mae arall yn cynnwys ymatebion o sectorau fel Melinau Trafod, Newyddiaduraeth neu'r Cyfryngau; a gyfunwyd er mwyn osgoi datgeliad.

Nodyn - Mae ymatebion gyda mwy nag un awdur a enwyd wedi'u cynnwys, yn y tabl hwn, fel un ymateb

Gofynnwyd i'r defnyddwyr pam y mae ystadegau am y boblogaeth yn bwysig iddynt. Yn gyffredinol, roedd y prif resymau'n cynnwys:

• Llywio polisi cyhoeddus cenedlaethol a lleol i roi'r strategaeth a'r wybodaeth orau
• Monitro tueddiadau a newidiadau mewn cymunedau a phoblogaethau
• Llywio penderfyniadau cyllid a dyrannu ynghylch gwasanaethau a ddarperir, er mwyn diwallu anghenion cymunedau lleol a grwpiau cymdeithasol  
• Ymchwil academaidd a dadansoddiad manwl yn y cyfryw feysydd astudiaeth
• Diddordeb personol ymatebwyr mewn cael y wybodaeth ddiweddaraf am y broses o ddadansoddi data ar gyfer materion sy'n bwysig iddyn nhw neu eu sefydliad
• Roedd nifer o'r ymatebwyr gan ddefnyddwyr data am y boblogaeth drwy gofnodion y Cyfrifiad at ddibenion hanes teulu a hanes cymdeithasol

Cyn lansio'r ymgynghoriad, gwnaethom waith ymgysylltu wedi'i dargedu i godi ymwybyddiaeth a gwella hygyrchedd ein cynigion i'r eithaf. Roedd hyn yn cynnwys cyfres o gyfarfodydd ford gron mewn nifer o sectorau, lle gwnaethom geisio adborth ar ein dull o ymgynghori a hyrwyddo pwysigrwydd ymgysylltu â'r cynnig ym mhob sector. Roedd y cyfarfodydd bord gron hyn yn cwmpasu amrywiaeth eang o ddefnyddwyr, ond roeddem yn ymwybodol ei bod yn bosibl nad yw'r sgyrsiau hyn yn unig yn cynrychioli cyfanswm sail y defnyddwyr. 

Yn ystod y cyfnod ymgynghori ffurfiol, gwnaethom gyflwyno rhaglen ymgysylltu fawr i gyrraedd cynifer o ddefnyddwyr â phosibl. Gwnaethom ganolbwyntio ar ddarparu adnoddau er mwyn sicrhau bod defnyddwyr yn gallu cael gafael ar wybodaeth i roi ymateb ar sail gwybodaeth i holiadur yr ymgynghoriad. Gwnaed hyn drwy negeseuon e-bost, cylchlythyrau, cyfryngau cymdeithasol, cynadleddau, gweminarau, cyfarfodydd a digwyddiadau eraill. Fel rhan o'r ymgynghoriad, rhoddwyd holiadur i'r defnyddwyr rannu eu hadborth ar y cynigion a sut y byddai'n diwallu eu hanghenion.

Bydd yr ymatebion i'r ymgynghoriad yn llywio argymhelliad gan Awdurdod Ystadegau'r DU, ar gyngor yr Ystadegaydd Gwladol. Bydd yr argymhelliad hwn yn nodi sut y dylai'r SYG lunio ystadegau am y boblogaeth a mudo yn y dyfodol, yn seiliedig ar angen defnyddwyr i gael ystadegau am y boblogaeth a mudo. Byddwn yn cyhoeddi canlyniadau ein dadansoddiad yn 2024, ynghyd â'r argymhelliad.

Mae'r ymgynghoriad wedi rhoi cyfle i'r SYG ymgysylltu ag amrywiaeth eang o ddefnyddwyr, gan gynrychioli'r boblogaeth a chymunedau amrywiol, rydym yn eu gwasanaethu fel llunwyr ystadegau swyddogol ar gyfer Cymru a Lloegr. Fodd bynnag, nid yw'r gwaith o sgwrsio ac ymgysylltu â defnyddwyr yn dod i ben yma: bydd angen i ddefnyddwyr barhau i fod wrth wraidd yr hyn a wnawn yn y dyfodol. Wrth i ni fynd i'r afael â'r argymhelliad ffurfiol a datblygu ein cynllun ymchwil ar gyfer y dyfodol, byddwn yn parhau i adeiladu ar yr ymgysylltiad a gawsom drwy gydol yr ymgynghoriad ac yn ymgorffori cyfleoedd i gael rhagor o adborth gan ddefnyddwyr.  

Hoffem ddiolch i'r holl ymatebwyr am eu hadborth gwerthfawr, a fydd yn parhau i lywio ein gwaith yn y maes hwn.

Os hoffech gysylltu â ni am ein cynllun ymchwil ar gyfer y dyfodol, e-bostiwch FPMSenquiries@ons.gov.uk

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) ran a consultation on the Household Financial Statistics Transformation (HFST) project, from 1 December 2022 to 23 February 2023. It was designed to provide us with information on how our statistics on income, expenditure and wealth are currently used, and to capture feedback on a series of proposals for the longer-term future of our statistics. For further details, please see our consultation document.  

We would like to thank all respondents for their valuable feedback, which will continue to guide our work in this area. We will keep users informed of our plans for this work as it develops into the future. 

The engagement exercise received 49 responses from a range of stakeholders.   

These consisted of:   

• 20 responses from the government sector, including local government and public bodies  

• 1 response from the business sector  

• 4 responses from think tanks  

• 3 responses from the voluntary, community and social enterprise sector  

• 12 responses from the academia and research sector  

• 9 responses from other respondents responding in a personal capacity  

Responses were submitted on behalf of individuals and organisations.  

Responses to the consultation highlighted the importance of our regular statistics on wealth, income and expenditure for providing valuable insights into the financial well-being of households.  

The consultation has allowed us to further understand user needs relating to these statistics. It highlighted: 

• the need for ONS to continue to produce its current range of Household Financial Statistics covering income, expenditure and wealth 

• while more frequent insights into financial well-being (the proposed household financial indicators) were seen as valuable, they should be developed alongside existing statistics rather than as a replacement 

• the need for a coherent set of income, expenditure and wealth statistics in order to produce consistent analysis across the topics 

• the issues around the coherence of the statistics, particularly on the topic of income 

• the various use cases for expenditure statistics at different levels of granularity 

• that users of wealth statistics would value an annual publication but recognised the challenges around sample size and valued the detail in our biennial outputs 

• the support for the regular publication of financial well-being statistics, particularly on financial resilience 

 For further details, please see our consultation response document.

In taking forward work in this area, we need to balance and phase the improvements we want to make against the resources we have available. Current work is focused on the following developments. 

• Re-introducing our financial well-being statistics with publications planned on poverty and financial resilience. 

• The introduction of a new digital diary tool for our field force interviewers to help with data collection from those that take part in our Living Costs and Food (LCF) survey. 

• Developing our research plans for income estimates for small areas in line with our vision for the future of population and migration statistics in England and Wales and feedback from users sought through the consultation that launched on 29 June 2023. 

• Potentially making our surveys shorter and simpler to reduce respondent burden, at a time when the survey industry faces difficulties engaging respondents.  

Since publishing the consultation, we’ve also further explored some of our proposals, including research and testing of changes to some of our household financial surveys. These include:  

• research into the collection of wealth data on our LCF survey 

• exploration of methods of collection such as the digital diary for the collection of expenditure 

• analysis of alternative data options 

More significant change which we had previously planned as part of the HFST project will require further investment. Responses to the consultation will provide a valuable part of the evidence base for securing funding for this work in the future. 

We would like to thank all respondents for their valuable feedback, which will continue to guide our work in this area. We will keep users informed of our plans for this work as it develops into the future. 

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) undertook an engagement exercise on a new mortality projection methodology for the national population projections (NPPs). It took place from 9 January to 20 February 2023 and was part of our strategy to continuously review and improve our methods.  

This exercise allowed us to gather feedback on the planned use of our statistics that could arise from the prospective change to the new mortality projection methodology. 

As a result of this feedback and with agreement from the NPP committee, which oversees the production of NPPs, we will adopt the new mortality projection methodology and provide guidance to users on its use in the next round of the NPPs, which will incorporate Census 2021 data for England, Wales and Northern Ireland. 

For further details, please see our response summary - new mortality assumptions method for NPPs.  

We would like to thank all respondents for taking part in the engagement exercise and appreciate the time taken to share their views. 

The engagement exercise received 23 responses in total, including six responses by email, from a range of stakeholders. These included businesses, industry bodies, central and local level government, academia, and those responding in a personal capacity. 

When we asked what your overall comments on the prospective mortality projection methodology were, the following main themes emerged. 

Methodology 

• Broad support for the new mortality projection methodology, which users said seems to be transparent and statistically sound. 

• Some users requested that more information be published on the detail of the methodology.  

• Some users valued the transparency and efficiency of using a model, while others were concerned about difficulty replicating a complex model for their own use.  

• There was a request to publish the model code and data to aid users’ understanding. 

• There is support for the added flexibility of the model to weight up more recent data and weight down more historical data; the weighting will need to be reviewed periodically. 

• The model holds up to scrutiny well when compared with similar projection models (such as those used by the Continuous Mortality Investigation | Institute and Faculty of Actuaries). 

• Further detail would be useful on how the initial mortality improvements were derived and how the cohort effects have been incorporated.  

• Discussion of the age ranges where different models are used needs to be presented clearly.  

• There are differences in the treatment of old age mortality compared with other models, but there was support for the proposal to treat mortality at older ages separately.  

Expert opinion  

• The input of expert opinion is valued, especially for mortality shocks and the uncertainty of long-term improvements. 

• Users requested more information on the membership of the expert panel.  

• Any assumptions need to be fully supported by data to show they are unbiased.  

Potential areas for development  

• It would be useful to test how the model would have performed in the past, to consider the accuracy of assumptions from expert opinion and potential for changing the weights or to publish results from past projections run using the new methodology. 

• We need to present mortality variants, for example for more and less optimistic assumptions about mortality improvement and assign probabilities to them. 

• Users told us in their requests for mortality projections for different subgroups, for example, by ethnic group or by deprivation decile, that these groups have been affected differently by the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, and experience different rates of mortality improvement. 

For further details, please see our response summary - new mortality assumptions method for NPPs. 

We committed to publishing this response summary to the engagement exercise by spring 2023.  

We are now using all feedback to refine and develop the new mortality projection methodology further to meet user needs. 

We have concluded from the results of the feedback that the mortality projection methodology is an improvement compared with our current methodology and will produce outputs that will broadly meet user needs. 

We will continue to make expert advisory panel minutes and the membership available to users on request to ensure that the assumption setting process is transparent. This will include information on the evidence to support the assumed long-term rates of mortality improvement by age and sex and the speed of convergence to these long-term rates. 

We will regularly review the specification of the model including weighting and shock adjustments and will be transparent with users about any changes that we make.  

We have noted that users have suggested applying the proposed methodology retrospectively to previous runs of projections. This is a complex task, and we know that any methodology – whether the proposed model or the current method – would not project the slowdown observed in mortality improvements since 2010. Our analysis of 2018-based and 2020-based projections suggests that the changes introduced by the model are no larger than those seen as assumptions change from one projection round to the next. This was detailed in the supporting article Prospective new method for setting mortality assumptions for national population projections, UK: January 2023. The model has the advantage of using the full time series of data on population and deaths, while also having the flexibility to weight up data from more recent years if the expert advisory panel feel this would better reflect likely future trends. Rather than re-running previous projections, we plan to invest in developing better ways to explain the uncertainty around future projections.  

We have noted that users require more information about the model. We will publish detailed guidance and an updated NPP Quality and Methodology Information (QMI) report including information about the strengths and weaknesses of any projections produced and guidance on how to use them. 

We will consider how we can make the model code publicly available. The input data is largely already in the public domain. We plan to run a user engagement exercise to understand users’ needs for future NPPs, Subnational Population Projections and Household projections. This will include questions about needs for variant projections, which will inform our assumption setting for the NPPs. 

We will communicate updates through our Demography newsletter. Please email projections@ons.gov.uk if you would like to sign up to receive these newsletters. The ONS release calendar contains information on population projections releases and we will update it accordingly.  

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) undertook an engagement exercise to review the Measures of National Well-being, from 3 October to 9 December 2022 (extended from 25 November). We asked users what matters most to national well-being and sought their views on our current measures and dissemination tools, including the Measures of National Well-being dashboard.  

This engagement exercise formed part of a wider programme of work to review the Measures of National Well-being. This research will feed into a recommendations report that will be published in spring 2023. 

For further details, please see our engagement exercise summary response document.  

We appreciate the time respondents took to share their views and would like to thank them for taking part in the engagement exercise. 

The engagement exercise received 120 responses from a range of stakeholders. In addition to the responses to the survey, we also received four letters in relation to the engagement exercise. 

Please note, not all respondents answered every question. 

Of the survey responses received, 82% responded on behalf of themselves, 18% on behalf of an organisation, and 1% on behalf of an informal group.  

When we asked what was most important to national well-being, the following 20 main themes emerged: 

• subjective and emotional well-being 

• good mental health and availability of mental health support 

• good physical health 

• social networks and meaningful relationships 

• community connections, cohesion and belonging 

• culture of care and support for each other 

• reduction of inequalities and discrimination 

• financial security, having money and being able to live comfortably 

• availability of social security and welfare support 

• quality and accessibility of public services 

• housing that is affordable, secure and of good quality 

• good working lives, satisfaction with jobs and work-life balance 

• personal development opportunities 

• pursuing hobbies, interest, and free-time activities 

• physical safety and security of individuals and spaces 

• access to green spaces 

• stable economy 

• trust that government is capable and represents the people 

• democratic values and civic participation 

• protection of the natural environment 

Respondents also listed other specific factors, however these were mentioned too infrequently to be grouped into themes. 

Your feedback on the measures of national well-being  

The majority of respondents said that the current measures of national well-being were representative or very representative of the well-being of individuals, communities and us as a nation, and that the bulletin, dashboard and dataset met their needs well or very well. 

A great number of responses were received when specifically asked for feedback on the measures, and suggestions for the future. For more details on this, please see the main report.  

Your use of the measures of national well-being outputs  

When asked, 56% of respondents said they did not currently use our outputs, while 44% said they use some or all of the outputs. 

Of those that use the measures, respondents most commonly cited using them for background information, their own research, and to include figures or insights in reports. 

When asked why they did not use the measures of national well-being, respondents mentioned not being aware of them, that the measures and outputs lack in relevance or quality, and presentation concerns. Other respondents highlighted that as they were now aware of the measures, they wanted to use them in the future. 

When asked to rank potential future developments in order of importance, the provision of more granular data was ranked first most often (37%), before comparability (36%) and timeliness (27%). Inclusions of additional breakdowns, inclusion of children, and improvements to data presentation and discussion were suggested as other desirable future improvements.  

Your feedback on accessibility of the measures of national well-being outputs  

Our outputs were most commonly accessed through a desktop computer and the ONS website. 

Charts and visualisations were ranked as the most important way of presenting our outputs, above numbers and data tables, and written commentaries and insights. 

When asked if they had any further feedback on our outputs, respondents mentioned improving data discussion and commentary, providing an overall assessment of change, enabling filtering and downloading of the data, and improving publicity of the dashboard.  

When asked how often they would like the dashboard, dataset and bulletin updated, quarterly was the most common response. 

Any other feedback  

We received 33 comments with research recommendations and general advice. These included 25 specific authors and research papers that the respondents recommended we consult. 

We asked if there were any specific developments our users would like to see in the measures of national well-being. The responses listed inclusion of children, greater emphasis on inequality, improved geographic coverage, and additional sub-population breakdowns.  

When asked if they had any final comments, respondents mentioned lack of coherence in the framework, the need for a higher public profile for the measures, improved policy use, and improvements to the dashboard.  

For further details, please see our engagement exercise summary response document. 

We published the summary of responses to our review survey on 10 February 2023. 

We will be using these findings, alongside additional research undertaken to review the measures of national well-being, to inform a recommendations report that will be published in spring 2023. 

We will be continuing stakeholder engagement as part of this wider work programme to review the measures of national well-being. 

The recommendations report will include an associated implementation workplan. 

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) undertook an engagement exercise around measuring “green jobs”, from 11 August to 6 October August 2022. This sought to understand users’ interest in the topic and explore preferences for definitions, approaches, and breakdowns. 

This engagement exercise forms part of an HM Treasury-funded Economic Data Innovation Fund project on defining green jobs, with the intention of producing recognised and harmonised measures for the UK. 

For further details, please see our engagement exercise summary response document. 

We would like to thank all respondents for taking part in the engagement exercise and appreciate the time taken to share their views. 

The engagement exercise received 107 responses from a range of stakeholders.  

These included:  

• 35 responses from individuals responding in a personal capacity 
• 33 responses from government, including local government and public bodies  
• 15 responses from academia or research  
• 11 responses from businesses  
• 8 responses from other professionals  
• 5 responses from third sector, including charities 

Around two thirds responded on a professional basis. Some 40% responded on behalf of an organisation or group.  

Respondents confirmed their current and/or expected uses of green jobs estimates, including:  

• growth and investment 
• policy or policies 
• skills 
• funding 
• net zero greenhouse gas emissions 
• ‘green’ transition over time 

The most popular definition among the three offered was the Green Jobs Taskforce definition; “Employment in an activity that directly contributes to - or indirectly supports - the achievement of the UK's net zero emissions target and other environmental goals, such as nature restoration and mitigation against climate risks.” This definition was preferred by 58% of respondents.  

The International Labour Organization definition was second favourite, ahead of the United Nations System of Environmental Economic Accounting, Environmental Goods and Services Sector definition. We also received comments highlighting the value of the three definitions offered, and similarities among them. 

We provided three options to frame a green jobs definition, which could be used to develop statistics. Most respondents (69%) ranked an occupation-based framing, as their favoured approach. For those who used one or more of the listed approaches, an industry-based approach was also regarded as advantageous, with a firm-based approach the least popular option of the three suggested. 

Almost half of respondents (49%) preferred geographic breakdowns of green jobs statistics from the three breakdowns offered (geographic, quality and demographic). However, users generally confirmed the merits of all three breakdowns. Respondents also offered suggestions for further breakdowns, with a clear demand for skills and educational attainment data, matched to green jobs statistics and data. 

Some respondents also commented on their wider interest in the environment (biodiversity, conservation, environmental protection, etc) and climate change.

For further details, please see our response summary document. 

We committed to publishing this summary of responses to the engagement exercise by the end of 2022.  

We are now using the results of the exercise to work towards publishing a definition by the end of the first quarter of 2023. This will be followed by experimental statistics in 2023, and longer-term and regular outputs.  

We will produce a methodology for these estimates, outlining how they might best be used, and we will also outline how these statistics and data can be disaggregated to effectively meet different user needs.  

We will include an assessment of the strengths and limitations of definitions and estimates, along with guidance on potential sub-categories of green jobs. 

We will also be organising further opportunities for engagement and continued consultation with stakeholders and users. We are planning a follow up workshop on 31 January 2023. The aims of the workshop will include:  

• discussion of the wording of an overall definition  
• exploring how any definition can be divided into sub-definitions, and which are most important  
• defining the detail of what is covered within any broad definition  
• identifying areas where stakeholders can work together to further develop this topic  

If you would like to attend, please get in touch.  

We will also publish and communicate project updates similar to our previous work plans.  

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) consulted on the redesign of the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) from 26 May to 21 August 2022. 

The consultation sought to update CSEW users on the planned survey redesign and provide the opportunity for comment on both the redesign and survey content.

The consultation focused on two areas: 

1. the methodological redesign of the CSEW including moving to a longitudinal panel survey design incorporating a multi-modal, wave approach 
2. the content of the current survey instrument, how data is used and the opportunity to suggest changes  

For full details, please see our consultation response document.

 We would like to thank all respondents for taking part in the consultation. We appreciate the time taken to complete responses and we will use the information provided to design a CSEW that continues to meet data and information requirements about crimes committed against the general household population in England and Wales.

The consultation received 58 responses from a range of stakeholders including individuals providing a personal view, individuals representing organisations and collective responses from organisations. These included: 

• 22 responses from government, including local government and public bodies 
• 13 responses from third sector, including charities and think tanks 
• 12 responses from police bodies and institutions 
• 8 responses from academia or research 
• 3 responses from individuals responding in a personal capacity

 Methodological redesign of the CSEW 

We were pleased to find overwhelming support for the introduction of a longitudinal panel design. Benefits identified with the approach focused on the improved reliability of main estimates of crime, and increased data granularity offered by a larger sample. The ability to identify trends in victimisation and perceptions over time as well as new insights into the nature of crime, were just some of the advantages mentioned. As anticipated, concerns with the new approach included data comparability, consistency over time and attrition. 

Similarly, respondents were supportive of the move to a multimodal design citing potential improvements in data quality and sample representativeness. It was also understood that a multimodal design could reduce costs and enable the increase in sample size. Concern was expressed in relation to mode effects, data comparability, capturing complex crimes, confidentiality and safeguarding.  

Improvements to screener questions were welcomed by respondents, with the increase in data quality being valued above the potential impact on comparability. Respondents also supported harmonisation of the CSEW classification system with the Home Office Counting Rules (HOCR).  

There was opposition to the removal of questions on non-domestic stalking within the domestic abuse, sexual victimisation and stalking module. Concern surrounded the impact on the violence against women and girls (VAWG) evidence base and the implications of the resulting data gap for funding of support services and evidencing change to the criminal justice system (CJS).  

There was support for the Children’s Crime Survey for England and Wales (CCSEW) moving to a longitudinal panel design in the future. The key benefit identified by respondents was the analysis of trends in child victimisation, with sample attrition cited as the main concern. The move to a prevalence only measure of victimisation in the CCSEW received strong opposition with concern about the lack of incidence data creating an evidence gap.  

Content of the current survey 

Respondents’ comments on the content of the CSEW illustrated the value of each of the existing modules. Various new topic areas were suggested for inclusion, including hate crimes, online harms, the victim-offender overlap, modern slavery, terrorism and vulnerability to radicalisation. Further in-depth questions for existing modules were requested including gangs and personal security, VAWG and sexual assault and the re-introduction of the restorative justice module.  

We have implemented a longitudinal panel design incorporating a multi-modal approach. Wave 1 of the new design commenced in October 2021 with the return of post-pandemic face-to-face interviewing. Wave 2 started more recently in October 2022, with the introduction of telephone interviews being offered to respondents taking part in the previous year. The continuation of face-to-face interviews at wave 1 will enable us to retain data comparability with previous years and we will evaluate the quality of data and develop robust methods before integrating data collected from wave 2.  

We have commenced a programme of research to develop online survey capability for the CSEW, starting with the screener and victimisation modules. Over time, we aim to supplement collections from wave 2 onwards using an online survey instrument and will consider how the design of a parallel run can ensure comparability and operational continuity for the survey. 

We share the concerns relating to the changing methodology, voiced by respondents to the consultation. We will conduct further research to engage with under represented groups to ensure sample representativeness and will consider methods to minimise attrition including the design of an optimal weighting scheme. We will conduct rigorous testing and monitoring of survey instruments including changes to questions and crime coding. We will consider various methods to ensure data comparability across waves and modes. We will keep users updated on all matters concerning data as the survey transformation progresses.  

Questions on domestic abuse have recently been re-developed to improve data accuracy. New domestic abuse questions will be published in spring 2023, alongside our evaluation plan and an update on the impact for other questions such as non-domestic stalking. We are also currently re-designing questions on the topic of adults who have experienced abuse in childhood. As a result of feedback from the consultation, we will consider additional themes including perpetrator demographics, the nature of victimisation and reporting of abuse. We are working with stakeholders and victims to ensure appropriateness and accuracy.  

We are currently working on an online self-completion module for the CCSEW, and the victimisation module will be re-developed alongside this. We understand concerns relating to a prevalence only measure and will continue to engage with stakeholders to understand data requirements. The collection of victimisation data online presents many challenges, so estimates produced from an online CCSEW will require robust evaluation.  

No large-scale changes will be made to the content of the survey instrument. The inclusion of new topics provides a challenge given the limited available space on the CSEW. However, consideration will be given to each of the new topic areas suggested and the expansion of existing modules, which may involve further input from stakeholders and data users. Developing our online survey capability will be an important step towards increasing capacity to collect additional data for new and existing topics on the CSEW. 

On 13 December 2021 the Office for National Statistics (ONS) published experimental gross value added (GVA) statistics at Middle layer Super Output Areas (MSOA) and higher geographies plus an accompanying article. The publication set Lower layer Super Output Area (LSOA) level data as the building blocks for higher level geographies.  

The ONS ran a consultation from 13 December 2021 to 7 March 2022 to seek users’ opinions on the experimental statistics. We asked users to help us understand:  

1. How they used the experimental statistics 

2. Whether they were going to access the building blocks dataset in the Secure Research Service (SRS) or not 

3. How useful they found the accompanying article 

4. Users’ suggestions about what we must do to improve the methods and procedures for producing subnational statistics 

5. If anything was missing from the accompanying article that would be beneficial to see in the future 

6. Users’ overall view of the experimental statistics 

7. If users wanted statistics broken down by industry, and why 

8. Whether they required any other industry breakdowns for their work 

9. Other subnational data requirements they wanted us to know and/or pursue. 

10. Other comments about the consultation 

The ONS is currently improving the availability of data at subnational level. It seeks to identify key areas of interest of different stakeholders with a view to build towards producing more (experimental) subnational statistics on a regular basis. Further, the ONS is working on a subnational data explorer facility, which is expected to mature into an online self-service platform, as discussed in the Government Statistical Service’s Subnational Data Strategy. 

Professional and personal users of the data responded to the consultation. Of the respondents, 71% were using the data professionally in some capacity, and 56% of the users worked in Government, including local government and public bodies. 

Users were keen to access the experimental data with over 80% showing interest in working with the data. Whilst the disclosive nature of the results meant that the data had to be held in the Secure Research Services (SRS) creating a 50/50 split in the ability in those users to be able to access it. 

You told us that: 

• disaggregating the gross value added (GVA) data to a subnational level helps to identify local trends in data over time, highlighting where economic activity is growing or declining 

• the provision of more granular data (e.g. the building blocks) helps to meet specific stakeholder needs 

• the presentation of data around the specific bespoke areas is clear and well structured 

• that we clearly communicated how disaggregating GVA to a subnational level created issues in disclosure at LSOA, requiring us to hold this data within the SRS due to legal requirements and that you were happy with the restrictions set out to access this data. 

Some users requested the following: 

• further data that can be compared to well-being economies/social systems alongside GVA and gross disposable household income (GDHI). 

• MSOA/LSOA data for hours worked, income tax and income, and employment changes  

• a user dashboard that allows users to visually ascertain data 

• explore the possibility of integrating with 3rd party data providers 

 
Industry breakdowns  

We asked our stakeholders to tell us their views about producing industry breakdowns of GVA at lower levels of geography. Our earlier investigations had shown that industry breakdown at LSOA level is disclosive. There is reduced risk of disclosure at MSOA level, and this can be addressed by grouping some industries together.  

Table of industry breakdown
Group 1			Group 2			Group 3			Group 4
A	Agriculture, forestry, and fishing		G	Distribution		J	Information and communication		MN	Business services activities
BCDE	Production		H	Transport		K	Financial and insurance activities		OPQ	Public administration; education; health
C	Manufacturing		I	Accommodation and food		L	Real estate activities		RST	Other services and household activities
F	Construction

 

The consultation results show that some users:  

• would prefer Group 1 to be broken down further, which is helpful for rural areas like Cumbria that consist of large agriculture and manufacturing sectors. Combining these two would mask important sector variations. 

• prefer grouping consumer facing businesses (e.g. retail, hospitality) separately rather than combined with distribution and transport. This will be investigated for practicality and the risk of disclosure. 

• suggested that education and health service are separated.  

Respondents to the consultation also made suggestions of what they want us to do in the future.  
Some of the suggestions or requests included: 

•  GVA broken down by environmental impact to inform the net-zero agenda. 

•  more frequent information on jobs and business change. For example, business demography quarterly below regional level – International Territorial Level (ITL) 3. ​ 

• sectoral breakdown of HMRC’s Pay As You Earn (PAYE) Real Time Information (RTI) by full time equivalent job count at ITL 3 level, but local authority preferred. 

• longer and up-to-date time series (less lagged) that will allow them to assess subnational impacts of Brexit.  

We are working on several projects to improve availability of subnational statistics, including: 

• looking to build a repeatable analytical pipeline for the ingestion and processing of data, in order to deliver future results in a timely manner 

• updating the GVA estimates to 2020 

• improving the apportionment methods that we use to breakdown GVA to lower levels of geography 

• break down GDHI to lower levels of geography 

In October 2021, as part of its Review of Travel and Tourism Statistics, ONS launched a consultation on a proposed approach for the future measurement of travel and tourism statistics.

The consultation sought feedback on this proposed approach which will be used to inform the recommendations of the review, due to be published in Spring 2022.

For full details, please see the consultation document.

The consultation received a total of 63 responses. These consisted of:

• 25 responses from the government sector, including local government and public bodies
• 9 responses from the business sector
• 7 responses from the third sector, including charities and think tanks
• 5 responses from the academia and research sector
• 17 responses from other responses (including individuals)

Responses were submitted on behalf of individuals and organisations. Some respondents provided feedback based on the views of multiple organisations.

The majority of responses were supportive of the proposed approach for the measurement of travel and tourism statistics in the future and agreed that it would deliver statistics that meet the needs of users.

The feedback received highlighted user demand for more timely estimates as well as the availability of estimates with more detailed geographical breakdowns. It also flagged a need to minimise and explain any discontinuities introduced that would affect comparisons with previous years.

Since we sought user feedback at a relatively early stage of this development, consulting on a vision for these statistics rather than the statistical outputs, a large number of comments sought more detail. In particular, respondents would like more evidence that the proposed approach can deliver the level of quality required by users for the required range of variables.

The feedback received through this consultation will be carefully considered and will inform the recommendations included in the final report on the Review of Travel and Tourism Statistics, due to be published in Spring 2022.

It is anticipated that a period of additional research will follow the conclusion of this review to further refine the proposed approach and allow an implementation plan to be developed. While the consultation responses will be important in defining this research, it is also our intention to continue to engage with users as further detail is available.

The document below captures the full breadth of responses we received in relation to this consultation, as well as our suggested actions resulting from them.

We, the Office for National Statistics (ONS), invited views on our proposals for the content design and release of Census 2021 outputs for England and Wales. In the proposals, we outlined how we plan to release census data and analysis in a phased approach.  

The consultation questions covered all phases of the release schedule. These phases are: 

• phase one: population estimates cross tabulated by age and sex, household estimates and other univariate data published as part of topic summaries or area profiles 

• phase two: multivariate data for the usual resident, household and communal establishment population bases 

• phase three: alternative population bases, small populations, origin-destination and microdata 

• beyond 2023: UK data and more complex analysis 

Gofynnon ni 

Gwnaethom ni, y Swyddfa Ystadegau Gwladol (SYG), wahodd sylwadau am ein cynigion ar gynllun cynnwys a rhyddhau allbynnau Cyfrifiad 2021 ar gyfer Cymru a Lloegr. Yn y cynigion, amlinellwyd sut rydym yn bwriadu rhyddhau data'r cyfrifiad a gwaith dadansoddi fesul tipyn.  

Roedd cwestiynau'r ymgynghoriad yn cwmpasu pob cam o'r amserlen datganiadau. Mae'r rhain yn cynnwys: 

• cam un: amcangyfrifon o'r boblogaeth wedi'u croesdablu yn ôl oedran a rhyw, amcangyfrifon o gartrefi a data unamryweb eraill a gyhoeddwyd fel rhan o grynodebau o bynciau neu broffiliau ardal 

• cam dau: data amlamrywedd ar gyfer seiliau poblogaeth preswylwyr arferol, cartrefi a sefydliadau cymunedol 

• cam tri: seiliau poblogaeth amgen, poblogaethau bach, data tarddiad-cyrchfan a microdata 

• y tu hwnt i 2023: data'r DU a gwaith dadansoddi mwy cymhleth 

We received a total of 312 responses to the consultation. Of these, 240 were submitted by people in their professional capacity, including 211 on behalf of an organisation.

In general, respondents said they supported our proposals. However, they did request some specific changes and additions.

We’ve provided detail of your requests for phase one products in the Census 2021 outputs consultation response: part one (pdf, 634KB) document, in the “Phase one conclusions” sections.

We’ve provided detail of your requests for products from phase two, phase three and beyond 2023 in the Census 2021 outputs consultation response: part two (pdf, 835KB) document. These are in the sections titled:

• “Statistical products: conclusions”
• “Census during a period of change: conclusions”
• “Paradata: conclusions”

In both these response documents, we also share the reasons you gave for the changes you’re requesting to our proposals.

You can find the original proposals you consulted on in the consultation document (pdf, 929KB). 

 

Dywedoch chi  

Cawsom gyfanswm o 312 o ymatebion i'r ymgynghoriad. O'r rhain, roedd 240 gan bobl mewn rhinwedd broffesiynol, gan gynnwys 211 ar ran sefydliad.

Yn gyffredinol, dywedodd yr ymatebwyr eu bod o blaid ein cynigion. Fodd bynnag, gofynnwyd am rai newidiadau ac ychwanegiadau penodol.

Rydym wedi darparu manylion eich ceisiadau ar gyfer cynhyrchion cam un yn y ddogfen Ymateb i ymgynghoriad allbynnau Cyfrifiad 2021: rhan un (pdf, 634KB), yn yr adrannau “Casgliadau cam un”.

Rydym wedi darparu manylion eich ceisiadau ar gyfer cynhyrchion o gam dau, cam tri a thu hwnt i 2023 yn y ddogfen Ymateb i ymgynghoriad allbynnau Cyfrifiad 2021: rhan dau (pdf, 812KB).

Mae'r rhain yn yr adrannau o dan y teitlau:

• “Cynhyrchion ystadegol: casgliadau”
• “Y cyfrifiad yn ystod cyfnod o newid: casgliadau”
• “Paradata: casgliadau”

Yn y ddwy ddogfen ymateb hyn, rydym hefyd yn rhannu eich rhesymau dros y newidiadau rydych yn gofyn amdanynt i'n cynigion.

Gallwch ddod o hyd i'r cynigion gwreiddiol y gwnaethoch ymgynghori arnynt yn y ddogfen ymgynghori (pdf, 1MB).

We’ve been evaluating respondents’ feedback about our proposals. We reviewed each request to assess if a minimum strength of need was provided for us to consider making the requested change. We then grouped respondents’ requests under one of the following three categories. 

These categories are:

1. not enough user need to consider changing the existing proposal
2. enough user need, and we’re now assessing how feasible it is to change the proposal
3. enough user need, and we’re able to change the proposal

Where we need to consider the feasibility of a request, we will consider factors such as statistical disclosure, data quality and cost. As such, users should not draw conclusions about our decisions for Census 2021 outputs based on these two consultation response reports alone.

We’ve provided a full list of our proposed changes to the phase one proposals, based on respondent feedback, in the Census 2021 outputs consultation response: part one (pdf, 634KB) document. These are listed in the “Summary of changes to phase one proposals” section.

We’ve provided a full list of our proposed changes to the proposals from phase two, phase three and beyond 2023, based on respondent feedback, in the Census 2021 outputs consultation response: part two (pdf, 835KB)  document. These are listed in the “Summary of changes to proposals” section.

Once our plans for each phase of the release schedule are finalised, we will publish the detail of those plans on the Census 2021 outputs webpages on the Office for National Statistics website.
 

Gwnelon ni 

Rydym wedi bod yn gwerthuso adborth yr ymatebwyr am ein cynigion. Gwnaethom adolygu pob cais i asesu a oedd angen digon cryf i ni ystyried gwneud y newid y gofynnwyd amdano. Yna cafodd ceisiadau'r ymatebwyr eu grwpio o dan un o'r tri chategori canlynol. 

Y categorïau hyn yw:

1. dim digon o angen ymhlith defnyddwyr i ystyried newid y cynnig presennol
2. digon o angen ymhlith defnyddwyr, ac rydym bellach yn asesu pa mor ymarferol yw newid y cynnig
3. digon o angen ymhlith defnyddwyr, a gallwn newid y cynnig

Lle mae angen i ni ystyried ymarferoldeb cais, byddwn yn ystyried ffactorau megis datgelu ystadegol, ansawdd data a chost. Fel y cyfryw, ni ddylai defnyddwyr ddod i gasgliadau ynghylch ein penderfyniadau ar gyfer allbynnau Cyfrifiad 2021 yn seiliedig ar y ddau adroddiad ymateb i'r ymgynghoriad yn unig.

Rydym wedi darparu rhestr lawn o'n newidiadau arfaethedig i gynigion cam un, yn seiliedig ar adborth ymatebwyr, yn y ddogfen Ymateb i ymgynghoriad allbynnau Cyfrifiad 2021: rhan un (pdf, 634KB). Rhestrir y rhain yn yr adran “Crynodeb o'r newidiadau i gynigion cam un”.

Rydym wedi darparu rhestr lawn o'n newidiadau arfaethedig i'r cynigion o gam dau, cam tri a thu hwnt i 2023, yn seiliedig ar adborth yr ymatebwyr, yn y ddogfen Ymateb i ymgynghoriad allbynnau Cyfrifiad 2021: rhan dau (pdf, 812KB).  Rhestrir y rhain yn yr adran “Crynodeb o'r newidiadau i gynigion”.

Unwaith y bydd gennym fersiwn derfynol ein cynlluniau ar gyfer pob cam o'r amserlen datganiadau, byddwn yn cyhoeddi manylion y cynlluniau hynny ar dudalennau gwe allbynnau Cyfrifiad 2021 ar wefan y Swyddfa Ystadegau Gwladol.

The ONS is assessing the feasibility of a survey measuring the current prevalence of child abuse in the UK. We published an article in January 2021 outlining our findings to date.

We are currently in phase one of the project, which aims to establish whether there is enough evidence to support carrying out a pilot survey (phase two).

As part of this, we consulted with users to understand:

• the need for improved statistics to understand the prevalence and nature of child abuse in the UK
• the impact of not having this data
• whether the proposed survey includes the elements that users feel are important and would meet their needs
• any other important considerations that should be explored in our research going forward

We received 91 responses to the consultation. Nearly half (44%) worked with or represented children or young people and 11% were decision or policy makers in national or local government.

Overall, there was strong support to take this work forward. Responses demonstrated the importance of survey data for designing strategies to prevent and respond to child abuse, developing and providing relevant services, and raising awareness of abuse.

You told us it’s important that;

• a survey includes all children, particularly, those with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) and who are home schooled
• a survey covers the whole of the UK and includes young people aged 16 to 25 years
• a survey provides appropriate support and takes proportionate safeguarding action
• schools are prepared and able to effectively handle the possible impacts a survey could have
• the limitations of a survey are clearly communicated alongside the data produced

We will undertake qualitative research with:

• children and young adults with experiences of abuse and parents of children with experiences of abuse, to hear their voices
• headteachers, special educational needs coordinators and safeguarding leads in schools to understand how a survey could be carried out in schools and how children and young adults with SEND could be included
• child protection leads working in local authority children’s social care services to understand how appropriate support and safeguarding could be ensured, and how home-schooled children could be included

We will also:

• carry out further research to understand how all UK countries can be included and how robust data for each of these can be achieved
• carry out further research to understand how young people aged 16 to 25 years can be included
• continue to engage with key stakeholders to understand how a survey could be integrated into schools
• continue to work with stakeholders, such as support organisations and the National Statistician’s Data Ethics Advisory Committee (NSDEC), to ensure any research is conducted in a sensitive and appropriate manner
• publish a progress update this winter, providing the qualitative research is completed, which will summarise the findings from further work, our conclusion to phase one, and outline our next steps

The UK Statistics Authority/ONS Inclusive Data Consultation was open to the public from 5 January to 26 March 2021 (12 weeks). The purpose aligned with the UKSA strategy, Statistics for the Public Good, and supported the work of the Inclusive Data Taskforce to ensure that: “…our statistics, [analysis and publications] reflect the experiences of everyone in our society so that everyone counts, and is counted, and no one is forgotten.” (Statistics for the Public Good, 2020).

 

We consulted to gain views on what was needed to improve inclusivity of UK data and evidence, where the gaps are or where data and evidence are currently lacking or partial (topics, quality), and where further work is needed. We also sought views on where to make improvements and what is currently working well.

The consultation received 185 total responses. These consisted of:

• 100 responses from individuals
• 83 responses from organisations
• 2 responses did not identify whether they were an individual or an organisation.

Of the responses received from organisations, ‘Charity and voluntary sector’ organisations provided the majority, 32 responses (38.6%). A further 14 responses (16.9%) were from ‘Local authority’ organisations and 11 (13.3%) were from ‘Academic/research’ organisations. There were 8 responses (9.6%) from ‘Government departments’ and 6 responses (7.2%) from ‘Public body’ organisations. Other organisations that responded included campaigning/lobby groups, unions, IT professionals, engineering/design, education, health and social care. 

The findings from this consultation have been used alongside other evidence gathered to inform the recommendations of the Inclusive Data Taskforce on improving the UK’s inclusive data holdings and infrastructure.

The recommendations, including a full analysis of responses received, can be found here.