NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

Form IA.5

CUMBRIA CONSTABULARY Impact Assessment/Adverse Impact assessment Summary outline for web site

Protective marking / Not Protectively Marked
Title / Information Sharing Policy
Policy owner / Chief Information Officer
Version / V4.00 dated6th Nov 2012
Summary / To provide members of Cumbria Constabulary with the appropriate guidance with regard to the sharing of Police Information with other agencies, to ensure that the sharing of this information with partners is carried out in an accurate, adequate, timely and lawful manner
Relevance
To race equality / Low
Board / (Originally) IMPACT Programme Board
Date created / 18 March 2008
Review
Date / 5th Nov 2013

Outline the data you have used to assess the impact of this policy/function.

No data collated highlighted any areas of concern. Discussion with interested parties during consultation did not highlight any concerns in relation to the 6 strands of diversity.

Outline how you have consulted, internally or externally, to assess the impact of this policy/function

  1. How the consultation was carried out
  2. A summary of the responses
  3. What you propose to do as a result of the consultation.

  1. Wide ranging consultation took place when the policy was formulated in 2008. Other forces were contacted for copies of their relevant policies and best practice was incorporated into the final policy. Relevant legislation was also considered and taken into account.
  2. Review of the policy in March 2009 included consultation within the Constabulary over a 4 week period. There was no external consultation.
  3. Responses from the consultation process were collated and actioned where appropriate.
  4. v3.00 underwent formal internal consultation in February, March and April 2010. There was no external consultation.
  5. v4.00 was consulted within PSD only, as the changes to the Policy only concern the redistributing of roles and responsibilities following Force restructure in 2011 and early 2012. The changes to these roles were advised to the business January 2012 and have been formally in place since 30 April 2012. It was therefore recommended that formal consultation was not appropriate.

Does the data or consultation indicate that the policy has a different impact on a particular group or groups?

Consultation responses in 2010 did not highlight any concerns in relation to the 6 strands.

If so which groups are affected?

NA

Is the different impact an adverse one for those groups? i.e. Does it put those groups at a disadvantage?

NA

Is there any evidence that this policy:

Is discriminatory?

Is damaging good race relations/failing to promote good race relations?

If so what is the evidence?

  1. No evidence that the policy is discriminatory.
  2. Not seen as damaging good race relations/failing to promote good race relations.
  3. NA

If the policy adversely affects people from certain groups, can it be justified because of its overall objectives? Explain in full.

NB Direct discrimination is not in law, capable of justification; only indirect discrimination can be objectively justified.

NA

What changes if any have you made to the policy as a result of this review?

None.

State how the ongoing affects of this policy will be monitored, and who will be responsible for this monitoring.

This policy will be monitored by the Policy Owner on an on-going basis for implementation issues, consistency of application and the potential for discrimination.
Relevant statistics will be recorded against the six strands of diversity by the Director PSD in relation to all reports of any breach or complaint about this policy. The(Diversity Implications Report) statistics will be reviewed annually in order to identify any trends, issues or concerns.
The policy will be reviewed in line with the published review schedule. The policy will also be reviewed whenever new legislation / guidance which may have an impact are introduced.
The monitoring of this policy will be done by:
  • Reviewing the policy and associated documentation to ensure the policy is still relevant.
  • Reviewing the implementation of individual information sharing agreements by consultation with key personnel responsible for their implementation.
  • Reviewing the Diversity Implications Report prepared by the Director PSD.
  • Consideration of any changes in legislation that need to be accommodated.
  • Consideration of any other feedback that has been received.

1

NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

Appendix 1.

Summary of consultee responses and actions taken.

Consultee / Response Summary / Action Taken
Disclosure Manager, PSD / Changes to roles and responsibilities have been implemented from 30th April.
No issues raised by equality or diversity strands. / No changes needed.

1

NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED