each interview. Consistency of coverage was balanced with ensuring that interviews captured what was most relevant and important to each respondent. In general, respondents were questioned in depth only about one piece of guidance: an Essential Guide or ‘Making Fair Financial Decisions’. In interviews in which both were covered, the second was in less detail. A copy of the test guidance was sent to respondents in advance of the interview and most respondents made time to look at it beforehand. Working through a document in detail before their interview was a sizeable requirement for respondents and time had to be allowed in the interview for respondents to remind themselves of what the guidance said. Interviews were scheduled to take an hour but many lasted longer. We are extremely grateful for the considerable time and effort that respondents put into this research and for the valuable insight they provided. Structure of the report The report is structured as follows: Chapter 2 completes the background section of the report (SECTION 1). It provides a overview of the PSED. It explains the law, differences between England, Scotland and Wales, and, importantly, what this means for the guidance that the EHRC publishes. The key findings from the research are set out in SECTION 2 as follows: Chapter 3 covers two contextual themes that are important to an understanding of the findings reported in later chapters. It includes findings from the research on the understanding and awareness that different internal audiences within public authorities have of the EHRC guidance, and the range of other sources of support on the PSED that public authorities use to understand it. Chapter 4 explores respondents’ awareness of the PSED and of the guidance produced by the EHRC, their experience of accessing it and how (if at all) they have made use of it. It also describes what respondents thought of the structure and presentation of the documents themselves (but not the substantive content). Chapter 5 deals with respondents’ understanding of the content of the PSED and examines how far the test guidance is successful in helping stakeholders to build a clear picture of the PSED, its purpose and benefits, what the legal requirements are, what compliance looks like, and what represents good practice (beyond compliance).
5. Is EHRC guidance on PSED comprehensive and understood? This chapter examines how far the test guidance is successful in helping stakeholders to understand the PSED and its purpose and benefits, what the legal requirements are, what compliance looks like, and what represents good practice (beyond compliance). Comparisons are drawn between the test guidance where possible and relevant. The main evidence for this chapter was gathered using a cognitive interviewing approach to investigate the level of understanding and elicit responses on specific sections of the test guidance (see section 1.3 for more detail on the method). However, it was difficult for some public authority respondents, even those with good background knowledge of equalities issues or legislation, to ‘stand back’ from the guidance sufficiently to offer an objective view of the content and how it is communicated: ‘I’ll tell you what’s weird for me, because I’ve been reading all this stuff since about 2002, it’s hard for me to know how much is in my brain and how much I just read, because I might just be making loads of assumptions that I don’t even know about. I see the duty as something that I’ve been aware of and had to comply with in some form since the Race Equality duty which was way back when. So I don’t even know what I see [the guidance] as, because it’s been so much of my job for so long.’ (England, public authority, local government, equalities specialist, Essential Guide for England) Some aspects of the PSED examined here are covered in all the Essential Guides and in ‘Making Fair Financial Decisions’ (for example, its purpose and benefits); others are covered in the Essential Guides only (for example, the specific duties) but not necessarily all of them (for example, only the Essential Guide for England
A shorter chapter entitled ‘What the law requires’, which mostly consists of principles drawn from case law that relate to the general duty (the ‘due regard’ duty). A chapter entitled ‘Putting the general equality duty into practice’, covers some of the areas that in Scotland and Wales are dealt with in separate specific duties, such as: establishing relevance of the duty to ‘your functions’; collecting and using equality information; meeting the duty in policy and decision making; engagement and procurement. A chapter entitled ‘Putting the specific duties into practice’, which covers publishing equality information and publishing equality objectives. A chapter entitled ‘Embedding the equality duty into your organisation’, which includes sections on internal governance and training. A final chapter on the regulatory framework discussing the various roles of the EHRC in relation to the PSED. APPENDICES: Legal text relevant to the general and specific duties for England. Extensive glossary. of the general and specific duties. About the specific duties in Wales: who is covered by the specific duties; what are the specific duties; guides on the specific duties. status of non-statutory guidance. Exceptions. The specific duties (and page references for the specific duties in implementing it and who needs to be aware of it. The specific duties, their purpose, who they apply to, what they require and the contents of each explained in summary. APPENDICES: Relevant legislation setting out the general and specific duties for Scotland. decision making. It also refers to requirements under the Human Rights Act 1998 briefly. Aims of the guide, reiterating the purpose of the guide and who it is for. The benefits of assessing equality impact, including reiterating what the law requires but also expanding on the business case and benefits of for using the PSED in the context of financial decision making. When impact assessments should be conducted. Quality assurance checklist: to ensure robust assessments are conducted and to provide pointers on how the assessment should feed in to the process (4 outcomes and suggested next steps). Some possible consequences of not properly assessing impact.
public sector equality duty’ develop better policies and practices, based on evidence be more transparent, accessible and accountable, and deliver improved outcomes for all. The public sector equality duty requires equality to be considered in all the functions of public authorities, including decision making, in the design of internal and external policies and in the delivery of services, and for these issues to be kept under review. The previous public sector equality duties shifted the onus away from an individual having to seek redress after suffering discrimination, and onto public authorities being required to take a proactive and organised approach to tackling ‘institutional discrimination’ and focusing on organisational change. These duties aimed to mainstream equality into public sector culture in practical and demonstrable ways. These principles continue to apply to the public sector equality duty. ‘Making Fair Financial Decisions’ (no page number) ‘Introduction’ and in the final section ‘What happens if you don’t properly assess the impact on equality of relevant decisions?’ The public sector equality duty (the equality duty) does not prevent you from making difficult decisions such as reorganisations and relocations, redundancies, and service reductions, nor does it stop you from making decisions which may affect one group more than another group. The equality duty enables you to demonstrate that you are making financial decisions in a fair, transparent and accountable way, considering the needs and the rights of different members of your community. This is achieved through assessing the impact that changes to policies, procedures and practices could have on different protected groups (or protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010). Assessing the impact on equality of proposed changes to policies, procedures and practices is not just something that the law requires, it is a positive opportunity for you as a public authority leader to ensure you make better decisions on robust evidence. If you have not carried out an assessment of impact on equality of the proposal, or have not done so thoroughly, you risk leaving yourself open to legal challenges, which are both costly and time-consuming. Legal cases have shown what can happen when authorities do not consider their equality duties when making decisions. Example: A overturned a decision by Haringey Council to consent to a large-scale building redevelopment in Wards Corner in Tottenham,