The Borough of Poole S Commitment to Ethnic Monitoring

BOROUGH OF POOLE

COMMUNITY SUPPORT AND EDUCATION SCRUTINY COMMITTEE

16TH NOVEMBER 2004

REPORT OF THE POLICY DIRECTOR (EDUCATION)

THE BOROUGH OF POOLE’S COMMITMENT TO ETHNIC MONITORING

1.PURPOSE OF THIS PAPER

1.1The purpose of this paper is to provide an explanation of why the Borough of Poole (BoP) monitors the ethnicity of its staff and service users that fall within the Support and Education Scrutiny Committee remit. It outlines the position of the service units with regard to monitoring ethnicity of employees and service users to date and sets out some of the challenges that face them with regard to monitoring.

1.2This paper arose from questions following the report on ‘CRE Code of Practice in Rented Housing from Feb 04-Jul 04’ taken to the Community Support Overview Group by Housing and Community Services on the 28th of September 2004.

2.ACTION REQUIRED

2.1That the Committee support the recommendations outlined below and to ask the Committee to consider if they want to have an update of progress against the identified failures in six months time.

3.RECOMMENDATIONS

3.1 Managing Diversity Working Group to address all employment monitoring obligations under the Race Relations (Amended) Act 2000 (RR(A)A 2000).

3.2 Managing Diversity Working Group to address the issue of monitoring service delivery to ensure consistency of approach, and consider including the collection of information on support requirements, such as language, religion and other specific needs. This should include mechanisms for regular analysis and publication of the data.

3.3 The Board of the Customer’s First Programme should explore the feasibility of recording the ethnicity and other support requirements of service users as recommended by the Managing Diversity Working Group.

3.4 Managing Diversity Working Group to address the need for an organisational consultation strategy to consult with black and minority ethnic and on other equality issues. Progress against this to be reported back in six months.

4.WHAT IS MONITORING?

4.1Ethnic monitoring is the systematic process by which we collect, store and analyse information about people’s ethnic backgrounds which should be used to set targets and measure performance around access to services and employment opportunities and practice.

5.WHY MONITOR?

5.1 The Borough of Poole (BoP) has multiple responsibilities as a leader of the community, as a current and potential employer, and as a provider of services. To be able to fulfil these roles it needs to understand the make up and needs of the community it serves, which is why the Authority systematically gathers a range of demographic information, of which ethnicity is a part. Collecting and analysing data is a part of good business planning that can help assess and manage the legislative requirements and other commitments that the Council has made to its staff and the community.

5.2 Without monitoring ethnicity the Council would not know whether it meets its race legislation requirements or if it lives up to the ‘equality’ dimension of the BoP values statement. It allows the Council to measure progress towards implementing its Managing Diversity Policy, (BoP’s commitment to equal opportunities in both employment but also in access to services for all members of the community), as well as performance against statutory equality indicators. Simply put, ethnic monitoring is used to identify inequalities between different groups, investigate their underlying causes and then work towards removing any unfairness.

5.3 Outlined below are three overarching reasons for monitoring ethnicity: legislative; performance; and the business case.

5.4The Legislative Requirement

5.4.1The Race Relations Amendment Act 2000 places a ‘general duty’ to promote race equality on public bodies to:

- eliminate unlawful discrimination

- promote equality of opportunity and …

- good relations between persons of different racial groups

5.4.2 The four principles of the general duty are that it is:

1. obligatory – it has to be undertaken and it cannot be claimed that the resources are not available to meet the responsibility

1. relevant – there is a need to consider whether all functions are relevant to race equality

1. proportionate – weight given to the function should be proportionate to relevance of promoting race equality

1. complementary – all three parts of the general duty complement each other. Sometimes they overlap but each part of the duty is distinct so the authority should find a way to meet all three.

5.4.3 It is important not to avoid taking action in one area of the duty (e.g. equal opportunities) for fear that there may be a possible negative effect on another (e.g. good race relations).

5.4.4The RR(A)A 2000 also empowered the Home Secretary to impose specific duties on policy and service delivery functions within key public bodies and the relevant ones to this paper are as follows:

- preparing and publishing a Race Equality Scheme

- assessing which of their functions are relevant to the duty (with a review of that assessment at least every three years)

- setting out arrangements for assessing and consulting on the likely impact of the promotion of race equality on new policies

- monitoring of policies for adverse impact on the promotion of race equality

- publishing the results of assessments, consultations and monitoring

5.4.5It is important to note that these ‘specific duties’ go beyond just monitoring and state that the BoP has a duty to publish the results of this monitoring and its impact on different racial groups.

5.4.6On the Personnel and Training aspects, all bodies subject to the general duty, which employ 150 full time or equivalent staff, should ethnically monitor staff for:

- job applicants

- training

- promotion or demotion as a result of performance assessment procedures

- involvement in grievance procedures

- termination of employment.

5.4.7The Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) recommends that organisations go beyond this duty and monitor how many applicants from each ethnic minority succeed and how many do not at each stage of the application process to assess the impact of the selection policy.

5.4.8There are also specific duties related to school governors and LEAs in relation to schools. Schools must:

- prepare and publish a race equality policy

- monitor and assess the impact of their policies, including the race equality policy, on pupils, staff and parents from different ethnic groups, with the emphasis being on pupil’s attainment.

5.4.9It is important to understand that whilst the ‘general duty’ does not say that the Council must monitor policy and service delivery it would be very difficult to demonstrate that the Council has met the duty to eliminate unlawful racial discrimination, promote equal opportunities and good race relations if it did not have this information.

5.4.10It should also be noted that the duty to promote race equality extends to contractors and partnerships where there are service level agreements or contractual arrangements. The Government views this as an important area where local authorities can have a great deal of impact on race equality. The scope of this paper does not extend to monitoring ethnicity in relation to BoP’s partnerships or contractors, except to say that the existing Procurement Strategy will be assessed and revised in the next financial year (2005/6). It is an issue that the Corporate Procurement Team and some other departments within the organisation are very aware of, and as a result of the review of the strategy there will be extensive awareness raising and training for all service units throughout the BoP to ensure the duty is fulfilled.

5.4.11At a recent conference Commission for Racial Equality, the independent body that has enforcement powers for the Act, stated it is increasingly issuing compliance notices against local authorities that are not fulfilling the duties of the Act.

5.5Corporate Performance Assessment

5.5.1Corporate Performance Assessments help local authorities improve their services for communities, and from April 2005 the Audit Commission (AC) will be using a revised methodology which will be increasingly focussed on diversity and human rights. During inspections the AC will assess how the organisation has gone about identifying relevant themes and how it intends to address them. Whilst the inspection will take into account proportionality and degree of risk to the organisation it is important to understand that this will be a key line of enquiry, requiring BoP to have business planning mechanisms in place that allow it to understand the needs all of elements of its communities. At a recent conference, the Head of Diversity at the Audit Commission suggested that councils would not be providing best value if one part of the community was not or could not access a service relevant to them.

5.5.2Councils have a statutory duty to report against a number of Best Value Performance Indicators (BVPIs). There are two BVPIs that specifically monitor a council’s position with regard to corporate health and “fair access” to services. In addition there are other race equality targets in both the BVPI and local indicators, where without monitoring ethnicity we would not be able to assess progress. Please see Appendix 1 for the current BVPI Race Equality Performance Indicators.

5.5.3It should be noted that there are mandatory inspections undertaken by specific government departments that require the related service unit to monitor, analyse and publish the ethnicity of service users. These are outlined in Appendix 2 under the survey of service units.

5.6The Business Case For Monitoring Ethnicity

5.6.1Understanding the profile of an organisations staff and its other stakeholders is good business practice and should be fully integrated into planning processes. Outlined below are some of the specific business benefits of employing ethnicity monitoring.

5.6.2In the Workforce

1. If the BoP accepts that its employees should reflect the make-up of the town, then monitoring ethnicity of staff allows the authority to track how representative different groups are at all levels of the organisation.

1. This information can be used to see how personnel practices and procedures affect different ethnic groups.
   
2. For Service Delivery

1. Monitoring within service delivery allows the Council to see which groups are using their services, and can be used to consider how to reach under-represented groups, develop services appropriate to their needs and provide for them fairly.

1. Resource allocation can be based on fact rather than guess work.

1. Comparison with national data and trends can identify particular groups which groups may be at risk, where focussed resource allocation can give some quick win results whilst long term problems can be more carefully monitored and addressed.

1. Monitoring promotes transparency and honesty about processes and outcomes.

1. This is baseline data from which BoP can identify future trends and monitor future activity and progress.

1. If issues are picked up at an early stage then this could help the Council avoid costly racial discrimination complaints.

6.SURVEY OF SERVICE UNITS APPROACH TO MONITORING

6.1A survey of service units was undertaken to assess the extent of monitoring undertaken, their approach and what challenges they face. Appendix 2 outlines the different approaches to ethnic monitoring taken by Personnel and Training and seven other services units that fall under the remit of this committee. Personnel and Training were included in this survey as they have the responsibility for monitoring all the staff working within these service units and have often led corporate action on equalities legislation.

6.2Appendix 3 outlines the questions asked in ascertaining the information from service units. Some service units responded in writing, others through meetings and/or telephone conversations.

7.SUMMARY FINDINGS OF SURVEY

7.1Recording ethnicity is difficult because of the subjective, multi-faceted and changing nature of ethnic identification, in addition to which consideration must be given to individuals being asked as some people find this a very invidious process. The credibility of the monitoring process is, however, seriously undermined if the percentage of employees or services users with ethnicity recorded is very low or if the information is unreliable. The summary of findings identified below sets out some of the challenges that are currently facing the BoP if it wishes to improve its performance in this area.

7.2The practice and approach taken by service units undertaking ethnic monitoring varies across the organisation.

1. Some service units monitor, analyse and publish the results of employees/and or service users’ ethnicity. Others only undertake part of the process. One does not undertake any analysis by ethnicity.

1. The ethnic coding categories used vary between service units. CRE advise that additional categories should not be created unless there is a specific need. It may be the case that some service units would find it useful to know whether Gypsies and Travellers, Portuguese and Jewish people are accessing services as there are significant communities in Poole but BoP has yet to develop a consistent or reasoned approach.

1. Some collect the information on first contact with the service user, others through a survey approach (generally where response rates have been low on an initial contact).

1. There are different acceptable levels of ‘unknown’ data. Some service units where lots of the ethnicity data is unknown are undertaking action to increase them. Most are not aware of the level of non-respondents and are therefore not undertaking remedial action.

1. Where service units are analysing the monitoring data they are using it to identify possible discriminatory practice and taking first steps to assess accessibility of existing services, rather than using it to consider developing new or targeted services for BME communities.

7.3.1The survey highlights the inconsistency of approaches between service units so one question arising from this is whether information on ethnicity could be undertaken at the service user’s first point of contact with the organisation and shared with other service units. There are a number of considerations that result from the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) that protects the rights of people about whom BoP collects and processes data that would need to be addressed before deciding this.

8.CURRENT FAILURE: THE NEED FOR CONSULTATION

8.1Even with an improvement and consistency of recording ethnicity there are still relatively small numbers of people in each of the minority ethnic categories, which means that numbers are not statistically significant and it is difficult to identify trends over time.

8.2This does not mean that these communities are insignificant as their isolation within the wider community may well mean that they suffer from disproportionate levels of discrimination or have specific needs. It should also be noted that all communities are dynamic and there are likely to be growing numbers of black and minority ethnic people coming to live in Poole, particularly with the regeneration plans which may well attract people of different ethnic groups to the area.

8.3It does mean that there needs to be other, flexible ways of assessing the needs and requirements of the BME population. There are numerous ways that service units are currently using to reach out to these communities by, for instance, providing information in plain English, through translations or access to translators through a Language Line (a translation service bought in by BoP). Adult Social Services is currently instigating a project to look at ensuring information on their services is accessible to black and minority ethnic communities.

8.4A more in-depth process of consultation with these communities is also required under the RR(A)A 2000, which the BoP has not undertaken extensively to date. Consideration needs to be given to how best to consult with such a small BME community to avoid or minimise consultation fatigue. Where existing BME community groups exist BoP has established some contact but it must be recognised that the dispersed nature of these people in Poole means there is still much work to be done to reach beyond the existing infrastructure.

8.5Service Units need to carefully plan new consultation: drawing on existing data the results of past consultation from internal and external sources; be prepared to share and respond to learning across departments; and provide feedback to the consultees. It will be necessary for service units to join forces, where appropriate, for consultation exercises and may also include working with other external agencies. The mechanisms and processes to do this internally need to be strengthened to allow consultation to be effective and sustainable in the long-term.

9.RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS

9.1It is important to note that there will be resource implications in both improving the processes for gathering, storing and analysing data but there should also be an awareness of the requirements needed to undertake consultation effectively. Better monitoring needs more effective systems and processes to able to provide useful information to inform decisions but is likely to increase the administrative burden, diverting existing resources away from current activities.

9.2Capacity of staff to undertake consultation with BME communities needs to be developed, and there may be a need to buy in expertise in the early stages or commission pieces of research for specific pieces of work.