Archived decisions

Appendix 5

Hampshire County Council

Best Value Review of Equality and Diversity

Research Findings - Role of ESAG, people and processes

Report to the Equality and Diversity Adviser

10 January 2005

Contact: Jane Tennent Taylor - 01962 846278

1. Objective of Report

To provide an overview of the findings from the research with members of the Equalities Strategic Action Group (ESAG) and other key corporate officers and to identify key issues for Hampshire County Council

2. Methodology

The aim of the research was to gather information from the members of ESAG and other key corporate officers with regard to the role of ESAG and the people and processes involved in the arrangements for equality and diversity across the authority. A questionnaire was agreed (see Appendix 1) and discussed with the individual members of ESAG across all departments and other key officers (see Appendix 2). The findings were then discussed with the Project Team for the Equalities and Diversity Review.

3. Findings

3.1 Findings are reported in two ways: firstly, as a summary of the main points arising from each area for discussion (see Appendix 1) and secondly as a summary of the key issues and areas for improvement that were identified (see Appendix 3).

3.2 Departments were found to have differing involvement in the Equalities and Diversity agenda. This is partly due to the specific functions of the Department (for example, PBRS have an Access Officer), but also the influence and commitment of the department's chief officer, senior management team and the membership of the departmental equalities team.

3.3 There were differences in opinion with regard to how successful ESAG performed. Most members felt that the role of ESAG as a disseminator of information was useful and the annual `celebration day' was a successful way of demonstrating achievements made. A number of areas for improvement were identified, particularly around reviewing the terms of reference of the group, strengthening its links with CMT and increasing its scrutiny role.

3.4 For departments, a key area for clarification and development was the implementation of impact assessments for reports to Cabinet and as an integral part of service planning. Little progress has been made by the majority of departments, although they have recognised the introduction of impact assessments as a priority for 2005.

3.5 Key actions or areas for improvement were identified as:

_ Stronger leadership from CMT and member level

_ Need to achieve balance between culture and compliance

_ Development of the scrutiny function

_ More guidance and direction on impact assessments

_ Improve availability of performance data.

3.6 Appendix 3 summarises the findings that support the identification of the areas for improvement.

4 Summary

4.1 The main vehicle for driving the equalities and diversity agenda across departments is the corporate group, ESAG. The research undertaken found that although ESAG had been instrumental in achieving progress in departments, greater impact could be achieved through a higher profile and commitment from CMT and member level to lead the equalities and diversity agenda.

4.2 In order to continue the progress made by ESAG and other key officers, the areas for improvement that have been identified as part of this review need to be addressed.

Appendix One

Summary of findings

This is a summary of the key points made against each question by those interviewed.

Area of discussion

ESAG - objectives, how well is the group functioning?

Filters down legislative changes.

Gives a view on corporate approaches to these changes.

Dovetails with existing policies.

Passes on information, directing what people should be doing, keeping the equalities agenda fresh.

Disseminating best practice examples from departments.

The once a year presentation isn't enough and needs to have a critique and support element.

It doesn't function as well as it could - the group is made up of a collection of interested people talking about what they have done, not what they should be doing/driving through corporately.

Group seems to have been diluted. It is not seen as important at DMT level.

Impact assessments - progress made in the department

The department is ready to implement them for every DMT paper and policy.

We have an action plan - on our web pages - and it is up to date.

Assessment framework is on our web pages.

Reports to Executive Members and to DMG are assessed.

Confused about the impact assessments. Need more direction.

Not clear what the guidelines are for reports.

No progress made.

Departmental processes and service planning

Next year service planning will involve quarterly exception reporting and equalities will be included.

Equalities is a standing item on our management team agenda.

We will be looking at integrating equalities into our business plans.

Equalities are not integrated into service planning.

Breadth of the equalities agenda is a problem for dissemination.

Difficult to overcome the barriers, including the perception `why do we need to do anything?'

Role of departmental equalities group and how well it is functioning

We have an action plan and we have achieved a lot. We are seen to be a group that gets on and does things.

All sections of our department are represented.

We have an action plan for each of our sections and we are developing an overarching departmental plan.

We recently undertook a departmental assessment on equalities ...the responses will be used to influence the departmental action plan.

Spend a lot of time talking about what the equalities agenda is about, no clear direction.

Group gets too bogged down in action planning, when need to get themselves in order.

Some of our actions are held up because of corporate inaction.

Not integrated into the department well - there are cultural barriers eg seeing equalities as an `industry'.

The DEG has struggled to establish itself and define its role in the department.

The group needs to be redefined to be able to more effectively achieve its objectives.

Role of champions

The director is supportive and supports the lead officer.

The director is a champion, and there are other key members involved with this agenda..

Our lead member is very supportive and celebrates the successes.

At senior management level, support is patchy.

Some service managers are more engaged than others.

Resources - financial and people

Funding is found as required - eg buy equipment as needed and make adaptations.

The Equalities Fair had a small amount of funding for staff cover.

Specific roles for some departments, eg Access Officer (PBRS), Race Policy Officer (SSD), Equalities and Diversity Officer (HR).

PAIRS (Positive Action Initiative Race Scheme) as a £20k match-funding project (SSD).

No specific funding to promote equalities and training etc.

There is a time issue - eg DEG members do not have specific allocation of time.

Diversity Officer role no longer exists.

Difficult for the Equalities and Diversity Officer to undertake all required activities.

Future - for ESAG and departments

Continue work to embed equalities in the department.

To continue work in setting up a departmental team.

ESAG would benefit from having specific tasks, eg making certain equalities is linked into the corporate strategy and establishing a method to collect all the evidence of good practice and achievements.

Members and COs need to get more involved and take it seriously. ESAG members need to drive it forward, but need high-level corporate team to lead the way.

Need to relaunch the group and revise what we are doing.

Impact assessment process is too complicated and needs to be simplified.

ESAG needs to have a clear brief to give direction to the departmental groups , who can then incorporate equalities into their service and training plans.

The Equalities Officer post should be in the Chief Executive's Department to make it a corporate role.

Need to look at the terms of reference and clarify the remit and direction of the group.

Appendix two

Interviewees

John Clarke	(Chair of ESAG)
Jane Goodwin	Equalities and Diversity Officer, HR
Mike Chivers	Unison
Rod Goldup	PBRS
Marcos Frangos	Access Officer PBRS
Vicky Jolly	Chief Executive's
Sue Sylvester	Policy & Performance Chief Executive's
Jenny Heath	Corporate Performance Chief Executive's
Marija Davies	Recreation and Heritage
Paddy Hillary	Policy Manager
Jane Suter	IT Services
Chris Locke	Hampshire Learning Centre
Roger Mead	Education
Jill Stannard	Social Services
Mohammad Mossadaq	Race Policy Advisor
Richard Read RR has been chair for last 4 years, he has just handed over to Terry Williams. I�m not therefore seeing Dave Richardson.	Environment
Terry Williams	Environment
Peter Brown	Performance Management Environment
Judith Downing	County Treasurer's
Paul Carey -Kent	County Treasurer's

Appendix three

Key actions/areas for improvement identified from the interviews

Key action/area for improvement	Findings
Stronger leadership from CMT and member level	The majority of ESAG members felt that there was strong support from their Chief Officers, but this wasn't particularly effective at CMT level. Clear direction and support from CMT would strengthen the role of ESAG and maintain momentum throughout the departments. CMT could also provide guidance on the terms of reference of ESAG, particularly for clarification of their internal/external remit. Greater member involvement was also highlighted as a benefit to the group and to the equalities agenda.
Need to achieve balance between culture and compliance	It was recognised that there was a need to examine how to progress equalities from both a cultural and compliance perspective. A clear statement of direction was needed from CMT that recognised the need to achieve and promote the appropriate culture in the organisation, whilst at the same time be able to formally meet specific legal requirements.
Development of the scrutiny function	Some ESAG members felt that there is a need for a greater scrutiny function. Although the annual celebration enables departments their equalities-related activities and achievements, there is no opportunity to question and review the activities or progress made by other departments. Several members identified the need for a mechanism to collect evidence of good practice in their own department throughout the year and share this corporately. This would also provide an ongoing scrutiny role, as well as facilitate their monitoring and end of year reporting.
More guidance and direction on Impact Assessments is required	Not all members of the group were clear about Impact Assessments. There was confusion over the process, and whether to use the Race and Equalities Impact Assessment or the EFQM model. There is also a need for guidance on Impact Assessments for reports to Cabinet.
Improve availability of performance data	Several ESAG members found it was not possible to obtain up to date and accurate performance data, for example to provide statistical analysis on the number of disabled members of staff in the department, gender issues and any changes over time. There was some confusion on whether this information was now available on SAP, and if so, how accurate it was. Data to measure external performance was also required.

This content is archived