Appendix 1. Equality Information Report Workforce and Governing Body Members Equality Information (incorporating 2017 WRES data)

Transcription

1 Equality Information Report Appendix 1 Workforce and Governing Body Members Equality Information (incorporating 2017 WRES data) For further information please contact: Emdad Haque Senior Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Manager, NEL CSU Emdad.Haque@nhs.net

2 Contents Summary P 3 Introduction P 4-6 Members P 9-12 Recruitment P Starter and leavers P 16 Staff experience P 17 Appendix 1: Action Plan P 18 Appendix 2: Workforce Disability Equality Standard P 19 2

3 2017 WRES Summary The 2017 WRES data highlights gaps in the same areas as noted in the 2016 data in the area of recruitment and a decrease in BME staff satisfaction in WRES questions in the staff survey. Key findings are as follows: A significant number of Governing Body have not declared their ethnicity (10/20 =50%) Staff survey results: compared to 2015, the 2016 staff survey showed an improvement in white staff satisfaction in terms of experience of bullying from patients and the public in the last 12 months, from other staff in the last 12 months and discrimination from other work colleagues. There was a 10% decrease in white staff satisfaction for the question the CCG offers equal opportunities for career progression or promotion. Compared to the 2015 staff survey, in 2016 BME staff were less satisfied in the areas of staff experiencing bullying or abuse from patients and the public in the last 12 months (19% of BME respondents said yes versus 2% of White respondents); were twice as likely as white staff to report harassment, bullying or abuse from other staff (12% BME staff vs. 6% White staff); were twice as likely to report discrimination (BME 9% vs. White 4%) and were significantly less likely to report that the CCG provides equal opportunities for career progression (BME staff 18% vs. White 74%). The under-representation of BME staff in Bands 8-9, VSM compared with the overall proportion of BME staff in the organisation. The relative likelihood of BME staff being appointed from shortlisting is less (1:8) compared to that of White staff being appointed from shortlisting across all posts (1:4). However, it should be noted here that performance has improved slightly since 2016 in terms of the ratio of BME shortlisted applicants to appointed (2017= 8:1 versus 2016:=10:1) Actions undertaken to address the above in the past year have included: a strengthened program of recruitment and selection training aimed at recruiting managers including two 1-day unconscious bias training sessions and focused teaching on equality & diversity on CCG recruitment and selection courses. A new Recruitment and Selection policy has been ratified by the CCG in October 2016 which highlights expected standards and good practice around equality and diversity in recruitment including the good practice recommendation that a BME panel member is invited on the selection/interview panel as a mitigation against unconscious bias. Despite these measures, it is clear more needs to be done to eliminate potential bias at the interview stage for senior management posts and redress the imbalance of ethnicity of the workforce at senior management grades. Further actions for consideration include: Repeat request to Governing Body hip to disclose ethnicity as an action from 2016 WRES report. Repeat training sessions on recruitment and selection and unconscious bias in 2017/18 to maintain awareness raising and review attendance on senior management interviews by BAME staff. BAME staff satisfaction: take staff survey WRES results to BAME staff network group for further discussion around suggested actions. 3

4 Background As a CCG we are required to publish our equality information to show how we are meeting our public sector equality duty as a commissioning organisation and an employer. This appendix is part of the equality information report and shows how the CCG has performed in terms of implementing the Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES) and Equality Delivery System (EDS2) to meet its public sector equality duty. The CCG employs 81 staff as of 31 st March 2017 which include 20 office holders who are not employees of the CCG but are on the payroll. We have included them for WRES purpose only. The report also includes information about our current workforce and Governing Body Members, recruitment, starters and leavers and staff survey results by protected groups. We have not included information about gender re-assignment as there is no data to report as currently the ESR does not have a category for gender-reassignment. This year we have combined the WRES report with the workforce diversity report so that we can show how the CCG is performing across all protected characteristics. This will also help us in our readiness to adopt the Workforce Disability Equality Standard (WDES) which will come in force when it will be part of Standard NHS Contract. 4

5 The roles of CCGs in implementing the WRES Clinical commissioning Groups (CCGs) have two roles in relation to the WRES as commissioners of NHS services and as employers. In both roles their work is shaped by key statutory requirements and policy drivers including those arising from: The NHS Constitution The Equality Act 2010 and the public sector Equality Duty The NHS standard contract and associated documents The CCG Improvement and Assessment Framework In addition to the NHS standard contract, the CCG Improvement and Assessment Framework also requires CCGs to give assurance to NHS England that their providers are implementing and using the WRES. Implementing the WRES and working on its results and subsequent action plans should be a part of contract monitoring and negotiation between CCGs and their respective providers. If there is something amiss with the providers implementation or use of the WRES, and/or what the results of WRES actually show, CCGs should have meaningful dialogue with those providers. However, the credibility of the CCGs relationship with its providers can only be meaningful if the CCG itself is taking serious action to improve its own performance against the WRES indicators. CCGs should commit to the principles of the WRES and apply as much of it as possible to their own workforce. In this way, CCGs can demonstrate good leadership, identify concerns within their workforces, and set an example for their providers. Formally, of course, CCGs are not required by the NHS standard contract to fully apply the WRES to themselves as some CCG workforces may be too small for the WRES indicators to either work properly or to comply with the Data Protection Act. However, neighbouring or similar (comparator) CCGs may wish to submit a jointly co-ordinated WRES report and action plan; this can counter any potential risk of small workforce numbers. 5

6 Our commitments to WRES and how we have prepared our the progress report NHS Haringey CCG is committed to implementing the Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES). In July 2016, the CCG published its second Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES) report which showed how the CCG measured against the nine WRES indicators for the period In addition a separate combined NCL WRES report was produced by NEL CSU for NCL CCGs which helped them to benchmark their race equality work with other CCGs. We are also working with other NCL CCGs to produce an NCL wide WRES report so that we can compare and benchmark our performance. Since 2016 NHS England has revised three of the nine indicators (indicator 1, 2 and 9). For example Indicator 1 now includes a specific requirement on how organisations should report on clinical and non-clinical staff, Indicator 2 requires the recruitment data to include both internal and external recruitment; and Indicator 9 now requires organisations to report on both voting and non-voting i.e. executive. The CCG already monitors and reports on Indicator 1 data by non-clinical staff and office holders most of whom are clinical staff. The new requirements of Indicator 2 and 9 will be implemented in This report shows how the CCG has progressed against the nine indicators for the period and includes (where applicable) a comparison to the WRES data. The report also contains recommended actions for the CCG to implement in to improve the CCG s position in relation to race equality. In order to demonstrate how the CCG meets each indicator, data has been collated from several sources, including workforce data from Electronic Staff Records (ESR) and TRAC; local demographic data from the 2011 Census as recommended in the WRES guidelines. The data on recruitment and non-mandatory training and CPD have been gathered from the April 2016 March 2017 records. The CCG has carried out a staff survey in 2016 and the results have been used for Indicators

7 Race WRES Indicator 1: Percentage of staff in each of the AfC Bands 1-9 or Medical and Dental subgroups and VSM (including executive Board ) compared with the percentage of staff in the overall workforce disaggregated by: Non-Clinical staff Clinical staff of which: - Non-Medical staff - Medical and Dental staff As mentioned on page five that the indicator has been changed since 2016 and now it includes both clinical and non clinical staff. In , the CCG reported its staff data by including permanent staff and those who are on the pay roll but not employed by the CCG (e.g. office holders). For comparative purpose, the CCGs has kept the grouping of the data to Band 1-7, and from 8 to 9 and VSM and has used a separate category for Office Holders who do not fit under either of the first two categories and they are not staff of the CCG (e.g. Governing Body who are clinical leads and are on payroll). Numbers have been included next to the percentages to show statistical significance. 7

8 WRES Indicator 1: cont d Table 1: Workforce by ethnicity compared with local population White 57% 54% 37 60% 2017 Performance compared with % Population (2011 Census) 61% BME 40% 41% 22 36% 5% 39% Not disclosed 3% 5% 2 3.3% 1.5% n/a Overall, in 2017 there was a 6% increase in the proportion of white staff in the CCG and a 5% decrease in BME staff compared with The 2017 proportion of BME staff versus white staff in the CCG is still similar to the proportion in the Haringey borough population (2011 Census data). 8

9 WRES Indicator 1: cont d Table 2: Workforce as at 31 st March 2017 across different bands plus office holders Band 1-7 Performance compared with Band 8a -VSM Performance compared with Office holders Number % Number % Number % Performance compared with White 10 40% = 27 75% = 9 45% 11% BME 14 56% = 8 22% = 1 5% 14% Not disclosed 1 4% = 1 3% = 10 50% 45% Band 1-7 staff: the pattern is very similar to 2016 performance with an over representation of BME staff in Bands 1-7 (56%) compared to the local population (39%) and an under representation of BME staff in Band 8a & above/vsm (22%) compared to the population (39%). Office Holders - there is a significant increase in the non disclosure of ethnicity with office holders (50%) which means that the data on Governing Body representation is hard to interpret. 9 Note: Change less than 2% is not shown

10 Workforce as at 31 st March 2017 and the changes since 2016 Table 3 Workforce by religion/belief Number % Change Atheism 8 13% 2% Christianity 23 38% 3% Hinduism 1 2% = Do not wish to disclose my religion/belief 19 31% 4% Islam 1 2% = Jainism 1 2% = Judaism 1 2% = Other 7 11% = Table 4 Workforce by marital status Number % Change Divorced 1 2% Married 23 38% 8% Single 31 51% = Civil Partnership 2 3% = Widowed 0 0% = Do not wish to disclose 4 7% = Table 5 Workforce by sexual orientation Number % Change Gay 4 7% = Lesbian 1 2% = Bi-sexual 0 0% = Heterosexual 39 64% = Do not wish to disclose 17 28% 2% Table 6 Workforce by disability Number % Change Yes 2 3% No 43 70% 12% Do not wish to disclose 16 26% 12% Table 7 Workforce by age Number % Change Under % = % = % = % = 61 and above 2 3% = Table 8 Workforce by gender Number % Change Female 40 66% 10% Male 21 34% 10% 10 Note: Change less than 2% is not shown

11 GB Members as at 31 st March 2017 and the changes since 2016 WRES Indicator 9: Percentage difference between the organisations Board hip and its overall workforce Table 9: GB Members WRES data against local population and workforce GB Members CCG Staff GB Members CCG Staff White 56% 54% 9 45% 60% BME 19% 41% 1 5% 36% Not disclosed 25% 5% 10 50% 4% The above information is based on the CCG s voting and the new changes in the WRES guidance to capture the diversity information of executive on the Board will be implemented in There are currently 16 voting on the CCG Governing Body. The percentage of White and BME GB is disproportionately low compared with the CCG s overall white workforce and the local population. This is due to non disclosure of ethnicity by a large number of GB (50%) Note: Change less than 2% is not shown 11

12 GB Members diversity data as at 31 st March 2017 and the changes since 2016 Table 10- Age group Number % Change Under % = % = % = 61 and above 5 31% = Not known 3 19% = Table 11-Sexual Orientation Number % Change Heterosexual 4 25% = Do not wish to disclose 12 75% = Table 12-Marital Status Number % Change Divorced Married 10 63% = Single 1 6% = Civil Partnership = Widowed 1 6% = Do not wish to disclose 4 25% = Table 14-Gender Number % Change Female 8 50% = Male 8 50% = Table 15-Religion/Belief Number % Change Atheism Christianity 1 6% = Hinduism 1 6% = Do not wish to disclose my religion/belief 9 56% 2% Islam Jainism Judaism 1 6% = Other 4 25% 17% There is still a large number of GB who have not disclosed their diversity information. Currently there is no disabled GB member. Table 13-Disability Number % Change Yes No 6 38% 13% Do not wish to disclose 10 63% 12% Note: Change less than 2% is not shown 12

13 Training Mandatory Training WRES Indicator 4: Compare the data for White and BME staff: Relative likelihood of staff accessing non-mandatory training and CPD 62% 4% 34% Table 16- non-mandatory training and CPD Change White 59% 28% 31% White BME Not disclosed BME 41% 45% 4% Not disclosed 27% 27% The CCG has an overall compliance rate of 66% in mandatory training. 71 staff attended non mandatory training and CPD programme in Take up amongst BME and white staff is broadly proportionate compared with the CCG workforce. White staff were 1.6 times less likely to access nonmandatory training and CPD courses than BME staff which is a marked decrease on the figures. 13 Note: Change less than 2% is not shown

14 Race WRES Indicator 2: Compare the data for White and BME staff: Relative likelihood of staff being appointed from shortlisting across all posts Table 1: Recruitment in Ethnicity Applications Shortlisted Appointments White % 46 28% 11 45% BME % % 13 61% Not disclosed 68 6% 15 8% Table 2: Recruitment in Ethnicity Applications Shortlisted Appointments White % 28 28% 7 54% BME % 63 62% 6 46% Not disclosed 63 6% 10 10% 0 0% In 2016/17, more BME staff applied for HCCG jobs (70%), were shortlisted (62%) and more successful appointments have been made (61%) compared with white staff. However, in 2017 the ratio of shortlisted White staff to appointment is 1:4 and the ratio of shortlisted BME staff to appointment is 1:7.7 indicating white staff have a higher chance of success at interview than shortlisted BME staff. The 2016/17 (1:7.7) data indicates an improvement in the ratio of BME staff shortlisted to appointment compared with 2016 (1:10). NB: 2016 Recruitment data BME Staff: 63 BME applicants were shortlisted and 6 were appointed = 1:10 ratio White Staff: 28 White applicants were shortlisted and 7 were appointed = 1:4 ratio 14 Note: Change less than 2% is not shown

15 Recruitment data from 1 April 2016 to 31 March 2017 Applicants Shortlisted Recruited Table 3-Age group Number % Number % Number % Under % % 6 25% % % 8 33% % % 6 25% % 24 15% 2 8.3% 61 and above 9 1% 5 3% 2 8.3% Table 4-Sexual Orientation Number % Number % Number % Gay 14 1% 2 1% 2 8% Lesbian 2 0% 0 0% 0 0% Bi-sexual 4 0% 2 1% 0 0% Heterosexual % % % Do not wish to disclose % 1 4% Table 5-Marital Status Number % Number % Number % Divorced 45 4% 5 3% 0 0% Married % 51 31% 5 21% Single % 89 55% 16 67% Civil Partnership 9 1% 1 1% 1 4% Widowed 3 0% 1 1% 1 4% Do not wish to disclose 71 7% 15 9% 1 4% Applicants Shortlisted Recruited Table 8- Religion Number % Number % Number % Atheism 72 7% % 4 17% Christianity % 81 50% 13 54% Hinduism 60 6% 8 5% 2 8.3% Do not wish to disclose my religion/belief % 21 13% 2 8.3% Islam % % 0 0% Jainism 4 0% 1 0.6% 1 4.1% Judaism 5 0% 1 0.6% 0 0% Other 86 8% 13 8% 2 8.3% In the CCG recruited 24 staff; Information on their protected characteristics is provided in the tables Table 6-Disability Number % Number % Number % Yes 55 5% 10 6% 0 0 No % % % Do not wish to disclose 29 3% 8 5% 0 0% Table 7-Gender Number % Number % Number % Female % % 14 58% Male % % 10 42% Do not wish to disclose 9 1% 2 1.2% 0 0% Note: Change less than 2% is not shown 15

16 Starters and Leavers from 1 April 2016 to 31 March 2017 Starters Leavers Table 1- Ethnicity Number % Number % White (White-British, White- Irish, and Any other White) 12 50% 12 57% BME 11 46% 8 38% Do not wish to declare 1 4% 1 5% Table 2- Sexual Orientation Number % Number % Gay 1 4% 1 5% Lesbian 0 0% 0 0% Bi-sexual 1 4% 1 5% Heterosexual 19 79% 16 76% Do not wish to disclose 3 13% 3 14% Table 3- Disability Number % Number % Yes 1 4% 1 5% No 17 71% 14 67% Do not wish to disclose 6 25% 6 29% Table 4- Gender Number % Number % Female 31 74% 33 85% Male 11 26% 6 15% Table 5- Religion/belief Number % Number % Atheism 5 21% 5 24% Christianity 10 42% 8 38% Hinduism 3 13% 3 14% Do not wish to disclose my religion/belief 3 13% 3 14% Islam 0 0% 0 0% Jainism 0 0% 0 0% Judaism 0 0% 0 0% Other 3 13% 2 10% Starters Leavers Table 6-Age group Number % Number % Under % 6 29% % 7 33% % 4 19% % 3 14% 61 and above 1 4% 1 5% WRES Indicator 3: Compare the data for White and BME staff: Relative likelihood of staff entering the formal disciplinary process, as measured by entry into a formal disciplinary investigation (This indicator will be based on data from the most recent two-year rolling average). The tables show the number of staff that joined and left the CCG in The green colour indicates a positive difference, i.e. more staff from a protected group joined than left the CCG. Haringey CCG commissions HR services from NEL CSU. Our designated HR Business Partner monitors the data on staff involved in disciplinary procedures through their internal process. There were less than 5 disciplinary cases reported in which is why the CCG will not mention the ethnicity to maintain the anonymity of the individual staff involved. 16

17 Staff Survey (WRES Indicators 5-8: Compare the outcomes of the responses for White and BME staff) Summary of 2016 Staff Survey outcomes (WRES Indicators 5-8) The CCG carried out a staff survey in which included the WRES Indicators 5-8 (see next slide for detail on questions). It would appear that the experience of some staff had worsened (highlighted in red) and the green indicates an improvement since staff completed the survey this gave a response rate of 81% based on the 62 staff invited to participate. Indicator 5- KF 25. Percentage of staff experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse from patients, relatives or the public in last 12 months White 9% BME 5% White 2% BME 19% Indicator 6- KF 26. Percentage of staff experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse from staff in last 12 months White 15% BME 15% White 6% BME 12% Indicator 7- KF 21. Percentage believing that trust provides equal opportunities for career progression or promotion White 83% BME 0% White 74% BME 18% Indicator 8- Q17- In the last 12 months have you personally experienced discrimination at work from any of the following? Manager, Team Leader, Other Colleagues White 6% BME 5% White 4% BME 9% 17

18 Appendix 1: WRES Action Plan (draft) Indicator Action Outcome Lead Deadline RAG 1. Relative likelihood of BME staff being appointed from shortlisting compared to that of White staff being appointed from shortlisting across all post (internal and external) Continue to provide training in 2017/18 to recruitment panel lead managers and staff on unconscious bias and recruitment and selection. Promote good practice ensuring that there is a BME panel member on the selection panel especially for positions in Band 8 and above. Likelihood of BME staff being shortlisted and appointed increased across all Bands to a comparable level with White staff. OD Lead/Jennie Williams 30 September Percentage of staff experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse from patients, relatives or the public in last 12 months. 3. Percentage of staff experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse from staff in last 12 months 4. Percentage believing that CCG provides equal opportunities for career progression or promotion. Data from 2017 WRES staff survey data to be discussed at joint Black, Asian, Minority Ethnic (BAME) CCG/Haringey council staff group for discussion on appropriate actions for consideration to be escalated to CCG OD workforce group and EMT. OD Lead to offer guidance around possible actions including mentoring; London Leadership Academy courses; staff support for public facing teams. Reduced incidents bullying and harassment in the organisation. Angela O Shea 30 September In the last 12 months have you personally experienced discrimination at work from any of the following: Manager, Team Leader, Other Colleagues 6. Percentage difference between the organisation s voting hip and executive hip of the Board Send to GB requesting them to provide data on ethnicity for WRES purposes. Continuously review the makeup of Governing Body voting to ensure race equality. GB voting reflective of the staff and local community. HR 30 September

19 Appendix 2: Workforce Disability Equality Standard (WDES) The NHS Equality and Diversity Council (EDC) has taken another pivotal step to advance equality within the NHS. The Council has recommended that a Workforce Disability Equality Standard (WDES) should be mandated via the NHS Standard Contract in England from April 2018, with a preparatory year from NHS England has agreed to do so. The EDC has also agreed to support a programme of work to explain and support it. The Equality Diversity Council considered the report published by Middlesex and Bedfordshire Universities on the Experience of Disabled Staff in the NHS, alongside findings from research carried out by Disability Rights UK and NHS Employers Different Choices, Different Voices, which found that disabled people had poorer experiences of working in the NHS in England than non-disabled colleagues. NHS England has begun consultation on the proposed Workforce Disability Equality Standard, alongside an extensive programme of communications and engagement to raise the profile of this initiative and to outline what support will be provided to organisations to deliver the change with disabled staff. The CCG already records disability data of staff who declare it. However, it will start planning a full implementation of the WDES in which will include working with other NCL CCGs and providers, improving data recording and disclosure, including WDES questions in the staff survey questions- and supporting staff through setting up staff networks 19