Workforce Race Equality Standard

Transcription

1 Report on the WRES Workforce Race Equality Standard REPORTING TEMPLATE Template for completion Name of provider organisation Date of report: month/year First Community Health and Care July 2018 Name and title of Board lead for the Workforce Race Equality Standard Liz Mouland Chief Nurse and Director of Clinical Standards Name and contact details of lead manager compiling this report Tina Gull Equality Lead Names of commissioners this report has been sent to East Surrey Clinical Commissioning Group and Crawley Clinical Commissioning Group Name and contact details of co-ordinating commissioner this report has been sent to Karen Devanny: Unique URL link on which this report will be found (to be added after submission) This report has been signed off by the Chief Nurse on behalf of the Board on 6 June 2018 Liz Mouland, Chief Nurse and Director of Clinical Standards. 6 June 2018

2 Report on the WRES 1. Background narrative a. Any issues of completeness of data First Community did not access the NHS staff survey in 2016 so we were not able to report on indicators 5-8 in We introduced the staff survey in 2017 and we now have two years of staff survey data. In January 2018 we carried out a data validation exercise which has improved the data collected for this year however we are aware that there are areas that need further work and these are reflected in our action plan, recommendation 1. b. Any matters relating to reliability of comparisons with previous years See above and indicator 5.2 we were unable to report this as per the technical guidance for last year and have reported as per the technical guidance for this year so the two years are not directly comparable. However next year we will have two years comparable data which will help us with the conclusions we make. 2. Total numbers of staff a. Employed within this organisation at the date of the report 447 b. Proportion of BME staff employed within this organisation at the date of the report BME = 9.2%

3 Report on the WRES indicators, 3. Self-reporting a. The proportion of total staff who have self reported their ethnicity As at 31st March % of staff reported their ethnicity b. Have any steps been taken in the last reporting period to improve the level of self-reporting by ethnicity As part of our WRES action plan we identified the need to update and refresh our workforce data. Personal data audit completed January As a result there has been a small increase in the number of staff self-reporting their ethnicity as the figure has increased from 86.7% last year. c. Are any steps planned during the current reporting period to improve the level of self reporting by ethnicity We have migrated across to a new payroll and HR system ESR. This will enable more uniform reporting in regards to WRES and other workforce data. 4. Workforce data a. What period does the organisation s workforce data refer to? 1st April st March 2018

4 Report on the WRES indicators, 5. Workforce Race Equality Indicators. For ease of analysis, as a guide we suggest a maximum of 150 words per indicator Indicator Data for reporting year Data for previous year Narrative the implications of the data and any additional background explanatory narrative For each of these four workforce indicators, the Standard compares the metrics for White and BME staff. 1 Percentage of staff in each of the AfC Bands 1-9 and VSM (including executive Board members) compared with the percentage of staff in the overall workforce. Organisations should undertake this calculation separately for non-clinical and for clinical staff. Non- Clinical staff BME Band 9+ Band 1 Band 2 Band 3 8.2% Band Band Band 6 25% Band % Band 8a Band 8b Band 8c Band 8d Non-Clinical Staff BME Band 9 + Band 1 Band 2 Band 3 6.8% Band Band % Band 6 Band 7 Band 8a Band 8b Band 8c Band 8d Action taken and planned including e.g. does the indicator link to EDS2 evidence and/or a corporate Equality Objective Due to the small numbers in some of the We will have an annual data audit and bands we recognise that this may not be a encourage staff to self-report. true reflection of the workforce. However we recognise that if individuals have not self-reported their ethnicity this will impact on the data. We will further analyse this data to understand the exact number of people behind these percentages. We have defined clinical roles as those requiring a professional registration on either the NMC or HCPC register is an essential requirement for the post. Clinical Staff BME Band 1 Band Band % Band 4 Band % Band 6 8.6% Band 7 6.2% Band 8a 10.5% Band 8b 33.3% Clinical staff BME Band 1 Band % Band 3 4. Band 4 Band % Band 6 6.4% Band 7 2.5% Band 8a 4.8% Band 8b 50. Band 8c 50.

5 Report on the WRES indicators, Band 8c 50. Band 8d Band 8d 2 Relative likelihood of staff being appointed from shortlisting across all posts. Short Appointed listed White BME Not 8 0 known Total White staff to be appointed from shortlisting = 21 (staff appointed) / 321 (staff shortlisted) = BME staff to be appointed from shortlisting = 3 (staff appointed) / 156 (staff shortlisted) = Relative likelihood of white staff being appointed over BME staff = / = , therefore white staff are 3.4 times more likely to be appointed than BME staff Relatively Likelihood = (White) / (BME) = 2.49 This data was for ALL applicants via NHS Jobs, not just shortlisted ones, compared against the staff who have started in the organisation. This year we have been able to report shortlisted and appointed data. From NHS jobs. With the introduction of new HR and Payroll systems and ESR we will improve further regarding the quality of this data next year. Shortlisting data required, Review Recruitment Policy, training and process. possibly introduce assurance by senior team We have introduced a leadership course which challenges unconscious bias. We intend to monitor how many staff: interviewed and are appointed are offered a post but don t accept are offered an interview and don t attend 3 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 a two year rolling average of the current year and the previous year. Total Number of Cases = 4, 2 BME, 2 White BME staff in Organisation = 41 2 (BME in disciplinary) / 41 (BME Staff Total) = (White in disciplinary) / 350 (White Staff Total) = Total No, of formal case = 4 2 BME, 1 White, 1 Unknown. 40 BME staff in Organisation. 2 (BME in Disciplinary) / 40 (BME Staff Total) = (White in Disciplinary) / 358 (White staff Total) = / = 8.6, therefore BME staff are 8.6 times more 0.05 (BME) / likely to enter formal (white) = 17.9, therefore disciplinary process BME staff are 17.9 times more likely to enter the formal disciplinary process This has not changed over the two years and we need to understand the reasons for this. Review HR Policies, managers training and process. Review the disciplinaries to further understand why this is and what action we need to take Focus groups were held during 2017 to help us to understand these issues. A BME staff network was set up and first met in December Meetings are to be held every 2 months terms of reference have been agreed.

6 Report on the WRES indicators, A Leadership Programme for Managers has been introduced which will include sessions on HR and Equality Diversity and Inclusion 4 Relative likelihood of staff accessing non-mandatory training and CPD. Educational funding Likelihood of White staff applications (for cash support) accessing non-mand training / CPD = applications (successful applicants) / 27 British 358 (total white staff) = 8 BME Declined to provide data Likelihood of BME staff 1 didn t supply any data accessing non-mand training / CPD = 3 (successful applicants) / 40 (total BME staff) = (Successful White) / 350 (White Staff Total) = (Successful BME) / 41 (BME Staff Total) = Of the 38, 2 withdrew applications (both British) 1 application not agreed as sufficient funding not available to support 2 applications from the same team. The other applicant from the same team was supported and both are BME

7 Indicator For each of these four staff survey indicators, the Standard compares the metrics for each survey question response for White and BME staff. Data for reporting year Data for previous year Narrative the implications of the data and any additional background explanatory narrative Action taken and planned including e.g. does the indicator link to EDS2 evidence and/or a corporate Equality Objective 5 KF 18. Percentage of staff experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse from patients, relatives or the public in last 12 months White 23% BME 21% White 24% BME 24% There has been a small decrease in the number of BME staff experiencing bullying harassment or abuse from patients this year. This is an experience of both BME and white staff and we are encouraging staff to report incidents so we can understand how best to reduce and mitigate risk and support staff. This is part of our staff survey action plan. Focus groups were held during 2017 to help us to understand these issues. A BME staff network was set up and first met in December Meetings are to be held every 2 months terms of reference have been agreed. 6 KF 19. Percentage of staff experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse from staff in last 12 months White 12% BME 38% White 14% BME 38% There has been no change in the number of BME A Leadership Programme for Managers has staff experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse from been introduced which will include sessions on staff in the last 12 months. HR and Equality Diversity and Inclusion 7 KF 27. Percentage believing that trust provides equal opportunities for career progression or promotion White 91% BME 73% White 93% BME 82% There has been a reduction in number of BME staff who believe that the trust provides equal opportunities for career progression. Development of career pathway in progress 8 Q23. In the last 12 months have you personally experienced discrimination at work from any of the following? b) Manager/team leader or other colleagues White 2% BME 16% White 3% BME 29% There has been a reduction in the number of BME staff experiencing discrimination at work We will work with our BME network to understand this further so they can inform the WRES action plan. To understand the reasons for the reduction and what we can continue to do. We will work with our BME network to understand this further so they can inform the WRES action plan. To understand the reasons for the reduction and what we can continue to do. Does the Board meet the requirement on Board membership in 9? 9 Boards are expected to be broadly representative of the population they serve BME BME The Board do not have any staff who are BME. The majority of the population in East Surrey (87.3%) reported their ethnic group as White British. Our Chief Executive to work with our Council of Governors will work to plan how our recruitment of Board members will reflect our community. Page 7 of 8

8 Note 1. All provider organisations to whom the NHS Standard Contract applies are required to conduct staff surveys though those surveys for organisations that are not NHS Trusts may not follow the format of the NHS Staff Survey Note 2. Please refer to the Technical Guidance for clarification on the precise means of each indicator. 5. Are there any other factors or data which should be taken into consideration in assessing progress? Please bear in mind any such information, action taken and planned may be subject to scrutiny by the Coordinating Commissioner or by regulators when inspecting against the well led domain. FCHC introduced the NHS Staff Survey in 2016 so we have two years data relating specifically to the NHS staff questions. 6. If the organisation has a more detailed plan agreed by its Board for addressing these and related issues you are asked to attach it or provide a link to it. Such a plan would normally elaborate on the steps summarised in section 5 above setting out the next steps with milestones for expected progress against the metrics. It may also identify the links with other work streams agreed at Board level such as EDS2. Page 8 of 8