Initial Equalities Impact Assessment
Department:
Environment and Sport
ES3.3
Completed by (lead):
Steve Hartley
Date of initial assessment:
3 November 2011
Revision Dates:
28th January 2013
5 February 2013
Area to be assessed: (i.e. name of policy, ES 3.3 Neighbourhood Service – reduction in Community Chest
Funding from £65k to £50k.
function, procedure, practice or a
financial decision)
Is this existing or new function/policy, procedure, practice or decision?
Decision
What evidence has been used to inform the assessment and policy? (please list only)
- Financial data
- Service Performance data
- Intelligence from community engagements
1. Describe the aims,
objectives or purpose of
the function/policy,
practice, procedure or
decision and who is
intended to benefit.
The proposed funding reduction is in response to the need for the Council to have a
balanced budget in line with reduced resources from central government.
Community Chest Grants are small grants up to a maximum of £500. These can be
accessed through the Neighbourhood Services’ 5 Area Offices. The grants support
small scale community led initiatives. They are distributed relatively evenly across the
District. Groups of people experiencing economic disadvantage may be impacted on,
the impact will be proportionate.
Beneficiaries - All people living within the District’s Neighbourhoods
Equalities issues raised through consultation:
The Community Chest was seen as providing vital funding for local groups at grassroots level. Reducing this funding could have an adverse impact on ethnic minority
groups in particular, as they are often the main service users of local grass-roots
groups.
Service Response:
The administration of these grants will continue to be carried out to ensure that the
process does not discriminate against any group working within the Area that the fund
is distributed to.
The Equality Act 2010
requires public bodies
to have “due regard” to
the need to:-
ics
rist
(1) eliminate unlawful
discrimination, harassment
and victimisation;
(2) advance equality of
opportunity between different
groups; and
(3) foster good relations
between different groups
cte
ara
Version 4 – 28.1.13
Age
2. What is the level of
impact on each group/
protected characteristics in
terms of the three aims of
the duty?
3. Identify the risk or
positive effect that could
result for each of the
group/protected
characteristics?
4. If there is a
disproportionately negative
impact what mitigating
factors have you
considered?
(2) Community Chest will
enable some group to
access opportunities that
they would otherwise not
See response to Q6 below
Please indicate high (H)
medium (M), low (L), no
effect (N) for each.
M – Groups working with
young people and also
older people frequently
seek funding
Disability
L
Gender
reassignment
Race
N
Religion/Belief
N
Pregnancy and
maternity
Sexual Orientation
Sex
N
Any other Area
L
be able to.
(3) – Community Chest
provides diverse range of
interventions some of
which may focus on
fostering good relations
between different groups.
N
L
M – Community Chest
funds are made on an Area
basis and may be focused
more on disadvantaged
groups although this is not
an explicit criteria in all
areas.
See response to Q6 below
See response to Q6 below
See response to Q6 below
See response to Q6 below
5. Has there been any consultation/engagement with the
appropriate protected characteristics?
Yes - proposal and potential equalities issues
have been consulted upon as part of the
budget engagement programme running from
August 2012 to February 2013.
6. What action(s) will you take to reduce any disproportionately negative impact, if any?
Remaining funds will be continue to be distributed along similar lines which should be no disproportionate impact
although overall less grants will be available.
The Council supports the establishment of the Bradford District Community Fund that encourages active giving in
the District and will provide small grants to community groups.
7. Based on the information in sections 2 to 6, should this
function/policy/procedure/practice or a decision proceed to
NO X
Full Impact Assessment? (recommended if one or more H under
section 2)
Assessor signature: Mick Charlton
Approved by: Steve Hartley
Date approved: 28th Jan 2013
Dates revisions approved:
Revision Dates:
28th January 2013
5 February 2013
2