Equality Impact Assessment
Part 1: Screening
When reviewing, planning or providing services Northampton Borough Council needs to assess the impacts on people. Both residents and staff, of how it works - or is planning to – work (in relation to things like disability). It has to take steps to remove/minimise any harm it identifies. It has to help people to participate in its services and public life. “Equality Impact Assessments” (EIAs) prompt people to think things through, considering people’s different needs in relation to the law on equalities. The first stage of the process is known as ‘screening’ and is used to come to a decision about whether and why further analysis is – or is not – required. EIAs are published in line with transparency requirements.
A helpful guide to equalities law is available at: www.northampton.gov.uk/equality. A few notes about the laws that need to be considered are included at the end of this document. Helpful questions are provided as prompts throughout the form.
HRA - Rent Accounting & Systems Support Project Management & Training Officer Posts / This is a review of an existing practice/policy.
2. Screening undertaken (please complete as appropriate)
Director or Head of Service / Fran Rodgers
Lead Officer for developing the policy/activity/practice / Gary Parsons
Other people involved in the screening (this may be people who work for NBC or a related service or people outside NBC) / Janette Hirst (Rent Accounting & Systems Team Leader)
Bill Lewis (Head of Finance)
Patrick Peddar (Finance Consultant)
3. Brief description of policy/activity/project/practice: including its main purpose, aims, objectives and projected outcomes, and how these fit in with the wider aims of the organisation.
Is it linked to NBC’s Corporate Plan? Service Plan? Other?
Please explain:
The review of the Rent Accounting & Systems team is required due to the current capacity issues the team is faced with, but also due to growth in Capital spend for the HRA Capital Programme from 2012 onwards of £200k per year. The review is identifying what the gaps are and what additional resource is required to enable the effective delivery of the IBS programmes going forward. There are also reviews of the main ICT department currently, and the impacts of the Localism Act and the Welfare Reform Bill, are going to have huge impacts on the systems we use in the Housing Directorate. The additional resource identified will help cope with this increase in workload.
4 Relevance to Equality and Diversity Duties
Is it linked to NBC’s Single Equality Scheme? NBC’s Public Sector Duties?
Equality Framework Criteria? Service or departmental equality priorities?
Please explain:
The purpose of the review is to ensure that sufficient resource is in place to deliver the IBS Programme going forward in 2012 onwards but also to provide support to the other service areas within the Housing Directorate that rely on ICT Support to deliver their functions. It is also important to be looking ahead at the changes coming out of the Localism Act, and Welfare Reform Bill and identifying how these changes will impact on the systems we use. The review is looking to identify this by looking at the current staffing structure and what is required, using existing workload information and previous reports on the team.
The public sector equality duty requires the Council to have due regard to a range of matters and these will be considered within the review. At this stage no direct negative impacts on Equality and Diversity duties under the Equalities Act 2010 have been identified.
Are there any aspects, including how it is delivered, or accessed, that could contribute to inequalities? (This should relate to all areas including Human Rights.)
No
If you have indicated there is a negative impact on any group, is that impact:
Legal?
No negative impact identified.
Intended?
No negative impact identified.
5 Evidence Base for Screening
List the evidence sources you have used to make this assessment (i.e. the known evidence) (e.g. Index of Multiple Deprivation, workforce data, population statistics, any relevant reports, customer surveys, equality monitoring data for the service area.)
ICT Strategic Business Review
Sovereign Report on the implementation of Open Housing 2009
Rent Accounting & Systems Structure Review
Market Supplement Approach to Systems Support role
Are there any significant gaps in the known evidence base? If so what are your recommendations for how and by when those gaps will be filled?
No significant gaps identified.
6 Requirements of the equality duties:(remember there’s a note to remind you what they are at the end of this form and more detailed information at www.northampton.gov.uk/equality)
Will there be/has there been consultation with all interested parties?
Yes
Please explain:
All members of the Rent Accounting & Systems team have seen the review document and are fully aware of the need to recruit to a Project Manager and a Trainer. Also Finance colleagues and ICT colleagues have seen the review document as part of the corporate ICT Strategic Business Review.
Are proposed actions necessary and proportionate to the desired outcomes?
Yes
Please explain:
As stated earlier in this document, a review has been triggered by capacity issues within the service area, and the requirement to expand the ICT Housing programme from April 2012 onwards. Therefore a review of the current roles of the team, and a plan to add to the establishment is necessary if the Capital Investment is to be delivered.
Where appropriate, will there be scope for prompt, independent reviews and appeals against decisions arising from the proposed policy/practice/activity?
Yes
Please explain:
By way of the recruitment process to the new posts required there will be an opportunity as normal to request feedback for unsuccessful candidates. However the set material as part of a standard Interview process will be adhered to using Northampton Borough Council guidelines and this will mitigate against any claims resulting from non-award of a contract of employment.
Does the proposed policy/practice/activity have the ability to be tailored to fit different individual circumstances?
Yes
Please explain:
Normal practice will be followed as part of the recruitment process and should any needs of individuals need meeting as part of the recruitment process these requests will be met.
Where appropriate, can the policy/practice/activity exceed the minimum legal equality and human rights requirements, rather than merely complying with them?
N/A
From the evidence you have and strategic thinking, what are the key risks (the harm or ‘adverse impacts’) and opportunities (benefits and opportunities to promote equality) this policy/practice/activity might present?
As this relates to a recruitment process, certain policies and procedures have to be followed corporately and therefore there is little risk involved with discriminating against a particular group or individual. Therefore using the corporate documents to recruit will ensure a fair and transparent process and will be accessible to all individuals who to choose to apply for the posts requested as part of this review. It is therefore suggested below that a ‘N’ signals No Negative impact.
Risks (Negative) / Opportunities (Positive)
Race / None identified / None identified
Disability / None identified / None identified
Gender or Gender Identity/Gender Assignment / None identified / None identified
Pregnancy and Maternity (including breastfeeding) / None identified / None identified
Sexual Orientation / None identified / None identified
Age (including children, youth, midlife and older people) / None identified / None identified
Religion, Faith and Belief / None identified / None identified
Human Rights / None identified / None identified
7 Proportionality
Describe the scale and likelihood of these risks and opportunities
As stated above, the risks are extremely minimal given the corporate documentation and process that will be followed to recruit to the proposed posts of Project Manager and Trainer.
8 Decision
Set out the rationale for deciding whether or not to proceed to full impact assessment
Date of Decision: 06…/10…./2011
We judge that a full impact assessment is not necessary since: This is a potential recruitment exercise that will offer all potential candidates the opportunity to apply for the two posts being requested, and is not anticipated to pose any negative impact.