The Government Actuary’s Department has reported a 4.8 out of 5 client rating for being “highly valued” in its 2025-26 feedback survey, according to a GOV.UK update and the accompanying client feedback publication. The department said this was the second consecutive year at that level and the first time every respondent awarded at least 4 stars on that measure. For readers tracking public-sector capability, the result is best read as a service-performance indicator rather than a policy change. It points to stable client confidence in GAD’s advisory role across government and related bodies, but it does not in itself demonstrate policy outcomes.
GAD said it contacted 168 client representatives and received 81 responses from 40 organisations. That gives the published results a reasonably broad institutional spread, although the response set remains materially smaller than the full contact base. In practical terms, the survey offers a snapshot of how commissioning bodies view GAD’s work on responsiveness, value and delivery. Because the exercise is based on client perception, its main use is as an accountability and management tool rather than a formal assessment of policy effectiveness.
On service measures, the department reported improvement in 3 of the 5 categories it tracks. Two measures did not improve. “Delivery to budget” remained unchanged at 96%, while the share of responses saying work was “within scope” edged down from 100% to 99%. Those figures suggest that the department’s strongest message is one of consistency rather than step-change improvement. A 99% or 96% score still indicates very high satisfaction, but the slight movement matters because GAD is presenting the results as evidence of organisational performance against strategic objectives.
The publication also notes that 52 of the 81 respondents provided written comments alongside the scored responses. That qualitative material is important in a survey of this kind because headline ratings can conceal differences between technical quality, timeliness, commissioning discipline and client communication. Policy professionals will recognise that written feedback often carries more operational value than aggregate scoring. It can identify whether problems sit with resourcing, project definition, turnaround times or the way advice is translated for decision-makers.
This survey period overlapped with the end of the first year of GAD’s 2030 Strategy, and the department used the exercise to test external views against its stated strategic direction. According to the published results, 97% of respondents agreed that GAD is succeeding in its aim to unlock value in its core work, while 94% agreed that it is making more impact on policy. Those are strong internal-facing indicators for a department seeking to show relevance beyond narrow technical delivery. Even so, they remain client judgements about perceived impact, not independent evidence that actuarial advice has altered ministerial decisions or produced measurable policy effects.
GAD Engagement Lead Joanne Ghosh said the results reflected the capability of teams across the department and the strength of client relationships. She also said the organisation would use the feedback as it moves into the second year of the 2030 Strategy, with an emphasis on more effective partnership working and continued innovation. Taken together, the release reads as a positive performance statement from a specialist government department with a stable client base and high satisfaction scores. The main takeaway for Policy Wire readers is narrower than the headline success suggests: GAD has published evidence of sustained client approval, but the release offers limited detail on how that approval has translated into specific policy decisions, programme changes or measurable public outcomes.