Different countries and regions across the UK have sought to reduce the financial impact of benefit cuts by introducing a range of mitigation measures. Research conducted with parents and carers on low incomes from across the UK highlights that, while devolved and localised mitigation measures create meaningful differences across the UK, they are not sufficient to prevent widespread financial hardship among families.

Participants in areas with more comprehensive or targeted support, particularly Scotland, reported relatively less severe hardship. In contrast, localised support aimed at offsetting the Benefit Cap and housing-related cuts – primarily through Discretionary Housing Payments – was seen as inadequate across the UK.

Many participants had been unaware of differences across the UK prior to the study and viewed these differences as unfair. There was limited support for a system in which levels of assistance vary by location. Instead, participants across all nations expressed a clear preference for more consistent and equitable provision, reflecting a shared perception that financial hardship is a UK-wide issue requiring a collective response.

Participants across the UK also highlighted important limitations in the design and delivery of existing mitigations. These include poor communication and promotion, restrictive eligibility criteria, limited duration, and insufficient payment levels. Participants recommended a series of improvements to strengthen the effectiveness of mitigation measures. These include:

• Proactively promoting available support to ensure eligible households are aware of it and can access it.
• Expanding eligibility criteria to reach a broader range of families in need.
• Increasing the value and duration of payments to better reflect the scale of financial pressures.

More broadly, participants emphasised that, while improving mitigations is important, it is not enough on its own. Structural issues within the wider social security system continue to drive hardship. As a result, there was a widely held view that the system should provide adequate baseline support, rather than relying on mitigations to compensate for its shortcomings.