Scotland's Migration Service: early insights evaluation

1. Executive Summary

This report presents findings from the early insights evaluation of Scotland’s Migration Service (SMS), conducted by Scottish Government (SG) analysts in September and October 2025. SMS aims to help attract and retain international talent to Scotland by providing business immigration support to employers and investors. It also provides personal immigration and reception support to individuals to help them move to and settle in Scotland. This holistic support aims to help address Scotland’s demographic challenges and workforce needs. The service includes two digital platforms. These platforms offer information and one-to-one advice sessions for migrants, employers and investors, as well as additional resources (including webinars) for employers and investors.

This report provides early insights to inform policy development and resultant required decisions in early 2026 regarding whether to re-procure operational supplier contracts. A re-procurement will be needed in order for the service to continue to operate from the 2027/28 financial year onwards. The analysis was conducted less than a year after the full service launch in November 2024, which meant it was not possible to assess longer-term outcomes. The evaluation aimed to assess early evidence of the implementation, early impact, and indicative value for money of SMS, drawing on monitoring data, user feedback, qualitative research, and economic analysis.

The evaluation was constrained by limited data availability in relation to user experiences and small and unrepresentative sample sizes. Findings should therefore be interpreted in light of this short operational period as well as the data limitations, and should be treated as indicative rather than conclusive. A follow-up evaluation is recommended after two to three years of full operation to robustly assess the impact of the service and inform future policy decisions. In line with this recommendation, a future evaluation of SMS is planned to provide a more comprehensive assessment of longer-term outcomes.

Context

Scotland faces a distinct demographic challenge, with declining birth rates and an ageing population threatening long-term economic sustainability and the delivery of public services.^[1] Migration plays a critical role in offsetting these trends by increasing the working-age population and addressing skills shortages.^{[3] [4]} SMS is a key deliverable of the SG’s Population Programme and contributes to national commitments in the SG’s Population Strategy and National Strategy for Economic Transformation (NSET) by supporting efforts to maximise the use of the immigration system and attract more individuals to Scotland to address skills shortages and demographic challenges.^{[5] [6]}

Evaluation approach

This early insights evaluation sought to address the following main evaluation questions (EQs):

EQ1: To what extent has Scotland’s Migration Service been delivered as intended?

EQ2: To what extent is Scotland’s Migration Service achieving its intended outcomes?

EQ3: To what extent does Scotland’s Migration Service deliver value for money?

The intended outcomes for SMS are articulated in a theory of change . The evaluation drew on both quantitative and qualitative evidence to respond to evaluation questions, including:

• Monitoring and performance data from April 2024 to August 2025;
• Web analytics data from April 2024 to August 2025;
• User feedback data, from surveys completed immediately after appointments (n=61) and 3-6 months following appointments (n=21);
• Qualitative interviews (including written interview responses) from migrant users of the service (n=12) from September and October 2025;
• Qualitative interviews with employers (n=2) from October 2025;
• Focus groups with service advisers (n=15) from October 2025;
• Stakeholder feedback (n=8) from October 2025;
• A narrative evidence submission of SMS delivery and implementation by the SG SMS team.

All evidence sources were analysed using the SMS evaluation questions and the SMS theory of change as the analytical framework. An indicative value for money assessment was also conducted by comparing the service’s economic contribution to its costs. Quantitative data analysis was not tested for statistical significance due to small and unrepresentative sample sizes, which would have limited the reliability of inferential statistics.

Key findings

Process

• Based on the early evidence analysed as part of this evaluation, SMS was found to have been largely delivered as intended, with core components implemented in line with its theory of change, including two digital platforms and tailored advice services for migrants, employers, and investors.
• The digital platforms were developed using a user-centred design approach. Two separate platforms were created for migrants and employers/investors, reflecting divergent user needs.
• Scotland’s Migration Service webpages, hosted over the two platforms, received over 1.4 million views between March 2024 and August 2025. They were visited by individuals from 183 countries, with the largest number of visitors located in India, the US, Indonesia, Pakistan, and Vietnam.
• Analysis of web analytics data suggests that the SMS webpages have reached a large international audience and helped direct traffic towards adviser appointments. This evidence also suggests that the Brand Scotland Study in Scotland campaign substantially boosted international awareness of SMS.
• Feedback from stakeholders was broadly positive, with 6 out of the 8 stakeholders providing feedback praising the service. One representative from a university careers advice service commended SMS for providing support to recent graduates, who otherwise may need to pay for legal advice at an important time in their careers. Other stakeholders working with international students credited the service for clearly articulating information linked to immigration policy, which can often be hidden or confusing.
• While the SMS project team has a structured process in place for ensuring that the service’s online content always reflects the latest changes to UK Government immigration policy, one stakeholder commented that they would like to see online content updated more quickly to align with changes in immigration policy. As such, it may be beneficial for the service to more clearly indicate that online content reflects the most recent changes in policy, or to give an indication of when online content was last reviewed.
• Focus group discussions with Citizens Advice Scotland (CAS) advisers highlighted opportunities for strengthening delivery, including creation of a centralised hub of immigration advice. CAS advisers also discussed whether it would be beneficial to access more information about appointment attendees in advance to ensure the provision of appropriate support. While one adviser felt this would be a welcome improvement, other advisers worried this may not be helpful as advice provided prior to appointments wasn’t always accurate or relevant to the issues users wanted to discuss at appointments. Advisers also reported a lack of capacity to support complex cases.

Impact

Migrants

• In the first 17 months that the service was in operation, 804 one-to-one advice appointments were held with 753 migrants, with 51 migrants attending more than one appointment with the service.
• The majority of these appointments were held with migrants who were already living in Scotland (79%) and who were aged between 25-44 (65%). Slightly more women attended appointments (45%) than men (41%). Appointments were attended by migrants from a wide range of nationalities, representing 92 countries, with the most common nationality amongst appointment attendees including; Nigerian (20%), American (13%), and Indian (13%). There was not sufficient data to establish whether different groups of migrants were experiencing or being impacted by the service in different ways.
• The evaluation was not able to robustly establish whether SMS makes it easier for migrants to move to Scotland and settle into their communities, two of the service’s key intended outcomes. This is partly due to lack of data on service user experiences to date, but also because the full service had been operational for less than a year at the time of evaluation.
• However, preliminary evidence indicates that SMS has supported migrants to relocate and settle in Scotland, and most users who responded to feedback surveys indicated that the service had met their needs. Furthermore, some migrants reported that the existence of SMS, and the fact that it is a Scottish Government service, had positively reinforced their decisions to relocate or settle in Scotland. The early insights evaluation also highlighted the positive impact of the service on migrant users’ wellbeing, confidence, and knowledge of the immigration system.
• There is therefore early evidence to suggest that SMS is delivering its desired outcomes, meeting migrants’ needs and helping migrants to move to Scotland and settle into communities.

Employers and Investors

• In total, 749 employers and investors attended SMS webinars from June 2024-August 2025, and the service delivered 146 one-to-one appointments, with 82 employers and 29 investors between April 2024 and August 2025. The majority of appointments were held with employers (77%). Most organisations had fewer than 20 employees (60%), almost a quarter (24%) had between 20 and 200 employees, and around 15% had over 200 employees. 20% of employers and investors were from the information and communication sector (including those working in IT and telecommunications), while 15% were in the professional scientific and technical activities sector (covering organisations working in law, accounting and research and research and development).
• Preliminary evidence suggests SMS has helped employers and investors use the immigration system more effectively and efficiently. Furthermore, evidence described in this report indicates that the service has supported employers in meeting their skills and labour needs.
• One investor reported successfully incorporating their business in Scotland following an SMS appointment.
• Two employers were interviewed for the early insights evaluation, though no interviews were conducted with investors. Both employers spoke positively about SMS, with one employer reporting that SMS helped them make informed decisions regarding the recruitment of two individuals.
• While the evaluation was not able to robustly establish whether SMS has had an impact on its employer and investor-related outcomes due to limited data, early evidence suggests employer and investor needs have been met through the service and that SMS is supporting employers and investors to use the immigration more effectively to meet their labour and skills needs.

External factors

• The evaluation also evidenced ways in which external factors are constraining the service’s contribution to its intended outcomes. Notably, elements of UK immigration legislation were referenced by a number of participants as barriers to long-term settlement and international recruitment. These barriers had influenced how positively they experienced the support received from SMS.

Indicative Value for Money

• As an early insights assessment, this analysis is not intended to provide a full economic evaluation, but rather an indicative assessment based on the evidence currently available.
• This early assessment is constrained by very limited outcome data and applies conservative assumptions to generate illustrative estimates of the employment-related economic activity supported by the service.
• In the absence of direct employment data, this analysis uses self‑reported “needs completely met” responses from a small, self‑selected sample as an indicative proxy for employment‑related outcomes.
• Follow‑up response rates were very low: 3% for migrants (24/753), 35% for employers (29/82), and 27% for investors (8/29).
• Returned surveys suggest 46 employment‑related outcomes, comprising 18 migrants (75%) and 28 employers (97%) reporting that their needs were completely met. These responses were treated as having potentially supported employment.
• For modelling purposes, non‑respondents are excluded, which is a conservative approach and so understates the potential employment supported as a result of the service..
• Using minimum visa salary thresholds, 46 employment outcomes are estimated to contribute £1.2–£1.9 million in Gross Value Added from employment income, compared with £2.3 million in service costs to date.
• On this basis, the estimated benefit–cost ratio (BCR) is 0.51–0.85, which is below 1 (where benefits equal costs), but is indicative and based only on an illustrative estimate of employment income of survey respondents and should be interpreted as an illustrative lower‑bound estimate based on the outcomes suggested by returned user feedback surveys.
• Sensitivity analysis shows that break‑even would be achieved under our modelling framework if:
  • the 46 outcomes were associated with an average salary above £49,050; or
  • the service supported 91 outcomes at an average salary of £25,000; or
  • the service supported 55 outcomes at £41,700 (i.e. nine more than the outcomes evidenced in surveys).
• Under our modelling framework, only 2–11% of non‑respondents would need to have achieved an employment outcome supported by SMS for the service to have a BCR of 1.
• Economic spillovers, investment impacts and wider social benefits, such as improved wellbeing, reduced stress, and increased confidence navigating the immigration system, are not monetised due to data constraints, but contribute to benefits.
• Overall, while the available evidence does not demonstrate that the monetised benefits of the service outweigh its costs to date, sensitivity analysis indicates that under our modelling framework, a BCR of 1 could be achieved with a relatively small number of additional employment outcomes beyond those suggested by the survey data. Taken together, these findings suggest the service may be delivering value for money, though this conclusion remains highly uncertain.
• It is important to note that these findings should be treated as conservative estimates. As mentioned, analysis was based upon data from a small number of user surveys, and did not consider the outcomes of users who did not return a user feedback survey. As such, the potential employment supported as a result of the service may have been understated. Secondly, while SMS provides services to individuals, employers and investors, the timing of the evaluation means that analysis focused on the employment outcomes of individuals completing user feedback surveys. As such, economic benefits specific to employers and investors were not considered as part of this economic analysis. Lastly, this analysis did not account for the wider social benefits of the service (e.g. improved wellbeing of migrants and increased confidence in navigating the immigration system), which also contribute to benefits.
• Looking ahead, the value generated by the service may increase as awareness and uptake grow. Strengthened outcome tracking, particularly on employment, earnings, investment, and the role of SMS in facilitating these outcomes, will be essential to enable a fuller Value for Money evaluation in the future.

Recommendations

• Digital content improvements: Feedback from one stakeholder suggests that it may be beneficial to more clearly signpost that SMS’ online content is consistently aligned with the latest changes in UK Government immigration policy, to increase confidence among users that the content is up to date. Advisers also recommended adding case studies, such as international students securing employment in Scotland or employers addressing skills gaps through global talent, to enhance relevance and engagement.
• Marketing and visibility: Advisers suggested branding SMS more strongly as a Scottish Government service could help expand its reach, and both advisers and stakeholders commented on the importance of increasing the social media presence of the service. Seraphus lawyers suggested using more digestible content formats including video reels, short how-to-guides, and short clips to widen the reach of SMS.
• Training and resources for advisers: Evidence from both CAS advisers and migrant users highlighted opportunities to strengthen service delivery through enhanced training and resources for CAS advisers. CAS advisers recommended the development of a centralised knowledge hub with up-to-date guidance, and template materials on common visa routes. This was suggested as an opportunity to streamline processes, reduce time spent on follow-up emails, and support the continued delivery of efficient, high-quality support to migrant users.
• Availability of appointments and advice: Both migrant and employer users provided suggestions for improving availability of appointments and advice. For migrants, this included expanding the number of appointments offered to individual users as the maximum of three per year was felt to be insufficient for more complex cases (although it should be noted that < 1% of migrant users had three appointments, with 90% only requiring one appointment). It may also be beneficial to consider how migrants who approach CAS in person or via a central CAS email address or phone number for migration advice could be supported more quickly, particularly as ‘walk-in’ users are likely to be more vulnerable or have more complex needs than SMS users who access the service through the online booking tool. One employer expressed a desire for an increase in the available appointments per year due to the complexity of the immigration scenarios they face. Another employer suggested SMS should consider developing a ‘helpline’ employers and investors could phone for advice, in addition to the available phone and online appointments. This employer did acknowledge this may be an unrealistic ask of a free service, and similarly noted that advisers would not have any time to prepare for these helpline calls which could limit advice.
• Improved data collection and evidence use: Data availability and quality limited the ability of this early insights evaluation to draw robust conclusions. Collection of outcome and output data, disaggregated by user characteristics, is required to enable assessment of the service’s performance and impact. Further analysis and use of evidence could support policy development and resultant strategic service delivery for SMS. This could include filling evidence gaps in relation to which sectors and regions of Scotland have unfilled vacancies. Similarly, a better understanding of which parts of the world have an excess number of workers in relevant fields and who might stand a realistic prospect of moving to Scotland would also be desirable to inform targeting of promotional activities.
• External factors: This recommendation relates to recognising and communicating how external factors, such as market complexity and the UK Government legal and policy environment, shape the service’s ability to succeed and achieve its intended outcomes. SMS could be viewed as a relatively low-budget intervention within both a sensitive domestic political context and a highly complex global migration market. While it has been possible to gather some evidence regarding the practical and personal value of the service to its users, it is more difficult to understand the macroeconomic impact of the service while isolating the effect of external factors. It has also not been possible for the service to provide tailored service offerings for subgroups of users or provide informative data related to subgroup service usage to stakeholders. These limitations, related to both the service’s scale and the context the service exists within, should be clearly articulated to decision-makers and stakeholders to manage expectations and inform decision-making, including the ministerial decision on whether the service should continue beyond March 2027. It is important that decision-makers and stakeholders fully understand the limitations and constraints of what a service of this kind can deliver, particularly when relatively small in scale.
• Address service gap in relation to job opportunities for international graduates: Evidence from the evaluation suggests that one of the challenges for SMS in meeting users’ needs is supporting international graduates to find skilled work in Scotland with an organisation holding a sponsor licence. Stakeholder feedback flagged that demand from international students for jobs far exceeds the supply of relevant roles. The service should consider if further marketing and promotion of the service to Scotland-based employers, with an emphasis on the potential benefits of obtaining a sponsor licence, could mitigate this barrier.
• Follow-up evaluation: A full impact and value for money evaluation should be conducted after at least two to three years of full operation to assess long-term outcomes, including migrant relocation and settlement. This should include longitudinal quantitative analysis, in-depth qualitative research with migrants, employers, and investors, and a cost-benefit assessment which includes consideration of social benefits.

Overall, this early insights evaluation has suggested implementation fidelity, indicated signs of progress towards SMS outcomes and value for money, although it was not able to draw robust conclusions due to data limitations. A follow-up evaluation is required to assess longer-term impact to best inform policy advice.