Public Service Agreement targets:

a gendered analysis

Sarah Payne and Sarah Ayres

with Paul Burton, Ray Forrest and Eva Lloyd

School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol


 Equal Opportunities Commission 2006

First published Autumn 2006

ISBN 1 84206 182 8

EOC WORKING PAPER SERIES

The EOC Working Paper Series provides a channel for the dissemination of research carried out by externally commissioned researchers.

The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Commission or other participating organisations. The Commission is publishing the report as a contribution to discussion and debate.

Please contact the Research and Resources team for further information about other EOC research reports, or visit our website:

Research and Resources

Equal Opportunities Commission

Arndale House

Arndale Centre

Manchester

M4 3EQ

Email:

Telephone:0161 838 8340

Website:

You can download a copy of this report as a PDF from our website, or call our Helpline to order a copy:

Website:

Email:

Helpline:0845 601 5901 (calls charged at local rates)

Interpreting service available for callers to the Helpline

Typetalk service available: 18001 0845 601 5901

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iii

1INTRODUCTION1

2METHODOLOGY3

3GOVERNMENTAL FRAMEWORK4

4DETAILED ANALYSIS OF PUBLIC SERVICE AGREEMENTS

IN THREE DEPARTMENTS5

5OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER6

5.1An overview6

5.2ODPM PSA 1 - Neighbourhood renewal: Floor Target 10 -

Worklessness7

5.3ODPM PSA 5 - Affordable housing10

6DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION AND SKILLS13

6.1An overview13

6.2DfES PSA 4 - Obesity14

6.3DfES PSA 5 - Looked after children16

7DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH20

7.1An overview20

7.2DH PSA 7 - Patient experience20

7.3DH PSA 8 - Vulnerable older people24

8CONCLUSIONS27

REFERENCES28

1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

OVERVIEW

In April 2007 a new gender equality duty (GED) will require public authorities to pay attention to gender equality in all their functions, including policy design and performance measures. This means that service providers and public sector employers will have to design services and employment with the different needs of women and men in mind. Public authorities will be expected to set gender equality objectives and take action to achieve them.

Public Service Agreements (PSAs) are three year agreements between government departments and the Treasury, setting out departmental targets as part of the Spending Review. This report analyses the 2004 PSAs in three government departments – the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) (now the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG[1])), the Department for Education and Skills (DfES), and the Department of Health (DH). It explores the extent to which PSAs are gendered, the availability of gender disaggregated data used to monitor PSAs in these departments and the possible impact of taking a gendered approach to the targets.

FINDINGS

Gender sensitive policy is likely to increase policy effectiveness by targeting resources more efficiently and tailoring service delivery to the specific needs of the population. Targeting resources in a gender sensitive way can lead to short and long term efficiency gains. For example, a gendered policy to stop individuals smoking is more effective in the short term as it takes account of different social behaviours of men and women. This also leads to longer term efficiency gains for the NHS due to a reduction in tobacco related illness.

Many government policies and targets are cross-cutting. Therefore, efficiency gains in one department may lead to improvements in other departments’ performance against their targets.

Addressing complex social and economic problems is hugely challenging, requiring an increasingly nuanced and sophisticated approach to public policy management. A gender disaggregated approach would help provide the detail required to make more informed decisions about multifaceted policy issues. Despite this, none of the PSAs in the departments studied take account of gender other than those relating to conception and teenage pregnancy.

There are significant differences between Government departments in their ability and willingness to respond to gender issues, in terms of their expertise, available data and personnel. Recognising the gender implications of policies is not always a top priority.

Research shows that the evidence base and information available for monitoring PSAs is often weak. Less than half of the data for indicators used to monitor progress towards PSA targets are gender disaggregated, although figures vary between departments and policy areas. With some of the PSAs, gender specific targets and gender disaggregated data would not be appropriate.

Although gender has a very low profile in the PSAs explored, ethnicity features at times. This suggests that the public sector duty on race equality has had some impact, indicating the possibility of change with regards to the gender duty.

A detailed analysis of six PSA targets (two in each department) suggests a gender disaggregated approach to the design, monitoring and evaluation of PSAs could improve departmental performance against these targets and provide other efficiency gains, as illustrated below.

Worklessness (ODPM)

There are important gender differences in the proportions of women and men who are not in employment and the reasons they are unable or unwilling to enter employment. Three-quarters of participants in the New Deal for Young People are male whereas the target group for the New Deal for Lone Parents (NDLP) is predominately female. Women of working age are more likely than men to care for a family member and the effect of partnership and of a dependent child on women's employment patterns varies greatly between ethnic groups. Women are at higher risk of developing mental health problems, particularly depression and anxiety, which affects their ability to work. A gendered approach, which takes account of the different needs of women and men, could result in efficiency gains both from reductions in state benefits and in demand for other public services. More detailed indicators and gendered policy interventions (such as the NDLP) would help to achieve the level of sophistication required to improve performance against this challenging target.

Affordable housing (ODPM)

Gender differences in income mean there are significant differences between women and men with regard to their opportunities for affordable housing. A higher proportion of single men than single women are owner-occupiers and women on low incomes, lone parents in particular, are marginalised from renting or purchasing homes in high cost areas. Attention to the different housing needs of women and men in different parts of the country could help the department to achieve this target. A gendered approach to the supply of affordable housing could also help the government to meet targets in other key areas, such as crime and health because of linkages between these and domestic violence, inadequate or inappropriate housing.

Obesity (DfES)

There are gender differences in the causes of obesity, how it is tackled and how accurately it is measured. In 2004, 16 per cent of boys and 12 per cent of girls aged 2-10 were obese, and 14 per cent of children overweight. For the 11-15 year old age group, more girls than boys were obese and overweight. The success of interventions such as school-based exercise and diet programmes differ, as girls and boys respond to different types of exercise and prefer different food. A number of efficiency gains in the short and long term could be made by taking a gendered approach to obesity, particularly by focusing on gender differences in key underlying factors and suitable interventions.

Looked after children (DfES)

There is a gender gap in achievement at all Key Stages in the school population and the educational performance of looked after children is well below the average for all children, but there are no gendered data on attainment available for this group. While overall outcomes for looked after children in general are poor, outcomes for girls tend to be worse. Levels of mental illness are high for both girls and boys in this population, who face different types of mental health problems. One in seven girls is already pregnant or a mother when leaving care and the risk of teenage pregnancy is associated with many of the factors also associated with being in care. Taking account of gender differences in educational attainment and in improving outcomes by designing interventions that are directly applicable for girls and boys could have both short and long term benefits. These include a reduction in under-age conceptions, health improvements (particularly for girls), and a reduction in the proportion of children who end up outside of education, employment or training.

Vulnerable older people (DH)

One of the main differences between the sexes is life expectancy. Women live longer than men, on average, with the result that more of the old and very old are women. More women live alone and women are also more vulnerable to poverty and deprivation than men, for a variety of reasons. There are differences in their use of both statutory and private home care services. It is essential to understand the differences between women and men in factors affecting their ability to sustain independent living and the level of services they require, in order to determine how well services meet need and which groups will benefit from policies designed to support them.

Patient experience (DH)

An improvement in patient satisfaction can lead to better health outcomes and so improve morbidity and mortality rates. Existing gender disaggregated data are very limited but suggest that women and men have different perceptions of their health service experience and that levels of satisfaction differ. The picture which emerges is mixed and stresses the need for a more consistent approach to data collection in order to understand the reasons behind these responses. Women are known to place a higher value on privacy, including being cared for on a single sex ward and having a carer of the same sex. Service providers need to know what the differences are between women and men in detail if they are to improve patient satisfaction, and to understand the reasons behind these responses.

Conclusion

These PSAs were analysed in order to demonstrate the potential for gender analysis across the PSA process as a whole and are indicative of what can be achieved. This study suggests that where a gendered approach is adopted, targets are more likely to be achieved and resources more effectively targeted, benefiting all those concerned.

1

INTRODUCTION

1INTRODUCTION

This report explores the availability of, and need for, gender disaggregated data in the assessment of Public Service Agreements (PSAs). From April 2007 a new gender equality duty will require all public authorities to pay due regard to the need to promote gender equality and eliminate discrimination in the delivery of services and in employment. This duty will require public sector organisations to pay attention to gender equality in all their functions, including policy design and performance measures. This means that service providers and public sector employers will have to design services and employment with the different needs of women and men in mind. It should generate policy making and services that are sensitive to gender difference. The Gender Equality Duty is part of the larger Equality Act (2006) that established the Commission for Equality and Human Rights (CEHR), and is due to become law in April 2007.

PSAs are three year agreements between government departments and the Treasury, setting out departmental targets as part of the Spending Review. Financial incentives are in place for departments who reach their targets. The PSAs set in the 2004 Spending Review for three departments - the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM)[2], the Department for Education and Skills (DfES), and the Department of Health (DH) are analysed here. The report focuses on the gender dimensions of these PSAs and the availability of gender disaggregated data which would help the departments’ response to the public sector duty on gender to be evaluated. Identifying the gender implications of PSA targets in all areas of policy is central to the public sector duty on gender equality, but there are other reasons why it is useful to do this. Policy and provision which is gender blind can obscure the specific needs of women or men, resulting in the inefficient use of resources and suboptimal outcomes for individuals. Gender sensitive policy which takes account of the role played by gender in shaping needs and experiences of public services is more likely to deliver greater policy effectiveness and improve performance against PSA targets. However, at present neither the PSA targets, nor measurement of progress toward targets, are gendered. A second related point is that many of the performance measures including PSAs are cross-departmental and, as a result, greater disaggregation of data carries added value for other departments.

Despite this clear rationale, there remain significant administrative barriers to gender analysis in policy making. Although the 2002 Spending Review made a commitment to website reporting on departmental PSAs ( the data reported are not gender disaggregated - for example, for the Department for Work and Pensions commitment to reduce pensioner poverty, figures are provided for all pensioner households. However, there are important differences between older women and older men in their risk of poverty, their reliance on state benefit and in the kinds of intervention which might help reduce poverty. Another issue relates to the complexity of the datasets used. Many PSAs are monitored by inter-linked datasets, creating problems in terms of linking populations where statistics are collected in a different time frame or in a different way. Where these data are not disaggregated by gender, finding alternatives may prove more problematic. It is also worth noting the timeframe and difficulty involved in making a case for change in how performance is measured:

Persuading the DH [Department of Health] or AC [Audit Commission] to revise an indicator to make it more meaningful can take years … Given the diversity of recording systems and cultures in which recording is taking place, it will take time for new indicators to ‘bed down’ and become part of the culture of management and professional practice.

(Miller, 2001: 15)

Nonetheless, despite these hurdles, changes in setting and measuring performance targets are possible. This report focuses on gender rather than the other public sector duties on race and disability. It is worth noting, however, that the Technical Notes (TNs) which support the PSAs comment on ethnicity but not gender, probably due to the earlier implementation of the public sector duty on race equality (in 2001). This provides an important indication of how far and in what ways PSAs might be able to incorporate the new gender duty in the future. For example, some of the targets in relation to ethnicity are about narrowing the gap between ethnic groups, and this approach could be extended to boys/girls and men/women in a number of PSAs. Having said that, more emphasis on the race duty requirements may be necessary as the PSAs themselves are largely neutral in terms of ethnicity.

The remainder of this report offers a brief account of methods used, an overview of PSAs, followed by a more detailed analysis of the PSAs in three departments, highlighting the case for gender disaggregation by an in-depth study of six PSA targets and the data they rely on.

1

METHODOLOGY

2METHODOLOGY

The study consisted of a review of the data used to measure performance against PSA targets in three departments - the ODPM, DfES and DH. The analysis focused on the value of national statistics in terms of specific PSAs, gaps in this data and alternative gender specific statistics.

The work was conducted in five key stages. First, the 2004 PSAs were identified for each of the three departments. Second, the technical notes relating to each of the PSAs and the 2005 Departmental Annual and Spring Reports were used to identify the indicators of success and the datasets used by departments to measure performance against PSA targets. Third, the researchers undertook a gender analysis of the data to:

  1. Ascertain whether the performance measures used by departments are gender disaggregated;
  1. Consider whether alternative datasets exist that might facilitate a gender analysis;
  1. Comment on the rationale for generating gender disaggregated datasets if these are not available;
  1. Comment on the rationale for incorporating a gender dimension to PSAs and/or performance indicators.

Fourth, two PSAs from each of the three departments were selected for a more thorough examination. Examples were selected that offered a potentially interesting angle in demonstrating the added value of a gender analysis. Finally, key comments and observations that have arisen during the research process were noted. These are presented in the conclusions.

1

DETAILED ANALYSIS OF PSA TARGETS IN THREE DEPARTMENTS

3GOVERNMENTAL FRAMEWORK

There are global and EU commitments to gender mainstreaming but the response in the UK has been relatively slow. Nonetheless, gender equity is not new to government departments, including the Treasury, and in recent years a number of initiatives focusing on gendered aspects of policy and service delivery have been developed. For example, in July 2004 the Treasury published ‘Gender Analysis of Expenditure Project’ (HM Treasury and DTI, 2004). The project looked at examples across different policy areas where a gender analysis might improve policy effectiveness. The work was said to have informed the 2004 Spending Review process but the specifics on precisely how remain unclear. Indeed, while the Treasury has expressed an interest in gender issues, a lack of human resources (time and expertise) within the department limits its ability to address the issue comprehensibly. Moreover, it has been suggested that Treasury groups (e.g. Poverty, Education) are viewed as highly variable in how they are equipped to deal with gender issues.