OBJECTIVES: Four hurdles associated with economic evaluations in welfare interventions were identified and examined in a previous published literature review. These hurdles include (i) ’Ignoring the impact of condition-specific outcomes’, (ii) ‘Ignoring the impact of QoL externalities’, (iii) ‘Calculation of costs from a too narrow perspective’ and (iv) ‘The lack of well-described & standardized interventions’. This study aims to determine how healthcare providers and social workers experience and deal with these hurdles in practice and what solutions or new insights they would suggest. METHODS: Twenty-two participants of welfare interventions carried out in Flanders, were interviewed about the four described hurdles in a semi-structured way. A thematic framework was developed to enable the qualitative analysis. RESULTS: The interviews revealed a clear need to tackle these hurdles. The interviewees confirmed that more condition-specific outcomes in economic evaluations are needed, especially in the field of mental health and stress. The proposed dimensions for the condition-specific questionnaires varied however between the interviewees. With respect to QoL externalities, the interviewees confirmed that welfare interventions have an impact on the environment of the patient (friends and family). There was however no consensus on how this impact of QoL externalities should be taken into account. Besides health care costs, the impact of welfare interventions on work productivity, the patients’ social life (culture, sport) and other items such as traffic accidents must be incorporated to provide an overall picture. Standardization appears to be of limited added value for most of the interviewees because they need a certain degree of freedom to interpret the intervention. Lack of time has been claimed by general practitioners as the biggest issue for standardization of welfare interventions.  CONCLUSIONS: This qualitative research demonstrated that these hurdles occur in practice and contributes to improve the methodological quality of economic evaluations of welfare interventions.