Initial Equalities Impact Assessment Template
Department:
Adult & Community Services
AS2.3 (part 6 of 9)
Completed by (lead):
Tony Sheeky
Date of initial assessment:
15 November 2012
Revision date
21 November 2012
Revision Dates:
31 January 2013.
AS 2.3 (part 6 of 9) - CBMDC, Voluntary & Community Sector
budget currently supporting Infrastructure Services.
Area to be assessed: (i.e. name of policy,
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)


Building Voluntary & Community Action in the Bradford District, ISOG 2011.
Voluntary Organisation Support Officer & Specialist Support Work.
Undertaking an EIA of infrastructure support services is problematic in that the core work is ‘organisational
development’ support to groups rather than work with individuals, although it’s fair to say that work with individuals
does form part of infrastructure and organisational development support, this EIA describes the impact of potential
decisions in terms of impact to ‘individuals representing groups’ within the protected characteristics.
1. Describe the aims,
objectives or purpose of
the function/policy,
practice, procedure or
decision and who is
intended to benefit.
The assessment assumes a 7.85% reduction in funding for this service area will be
applied to the Voluntary and Community Sector budget. This will be applied on a pro
rata basis to all current commissions in this service area. Current commissions support
the delivery of organisational development support to the wider voluntary and
community sector. Recognising that the budget will not meet all identified needs the
proposal is to focus the funds available on the Active Citizenship agenda,
Volunteering, Citizens Working Together, Campaigning & Voice and Fundraising
support. Evidence of need/priorities was drawn from the DIVA survey of VCS groups,
the annual monitoring stats from VOSO and Specialist Support commissions (Cohort
2010 – 2011) and quarterly monitoring reports of existing provision.
Consultation Concerns:
Concerns were raised that reduced funding must adversely affect the quality of
services being provided by the VCS who support & deliver services to the most
vulnerable communities and individuals. Cultural services can be used to contribute to
a positive impact on wellbeing and health, social isolation, communities, education and
regeneration.
Equalities Challenge:
Perceived as having a disproportionate impact on vulnerable people including younger
and older people, and BME groups, especially if early intervention and preventative
services are reduced. Cuts to culture groups are likely to have a disproportionately
high impact on those most in need who cannot afford to move outside their own
communities to access cultural provision, which could be compounded by cuts in
transport services leading to increased social isolation of people with disabilities and
parents/carers.
Service Response:
Commissioned service providers understand they need to review current priorities &
change working practices to mitigate potential negative impacts on vulnerable people.
Consultation will continue within with providers and service users appropriately. The
Culture Strategy is being reviewed and will be updated to reflect the impact of funding
reductions on all stakeholders including people with disabilities and their
parents/carers.
The Public Sector
Equality Duty requires
the Council to have
“due regard” to the
need to:-
Protected characteristics
(1) eliminate unlawful
discrimination, harassment
and victimisation;
(2) advance equality of
opportunity between different
groups; and
(3) foster good relations
between different groups
(see guidance notes)
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?
Currently 13% of VOSO
support is to young
people’s
groups/individuals.
Potential disproportionate
impact on young, new
entrants to the
employment market, a
good proportion of who
undertake volunteering to
gain work experience.
Potential lesser impact on
older peoples and over
50’s groups, also a
significant volunteering
capacity.
Currently 8% of VOSO
support and 9% of
Specialist support is to
Disability
groups/individuals. A
reduction or loss of
funding for equalities work
would impact on these.
Potential disproportionate
impact on disability
groups/individuals.
No significant
disproportionate impact
identified but will discuss
ways to mitigate against
any yet unidentified
disproportionate impact
with providers.
Potential disproportionate
impact on ethnic minority
groups/individuals as a
result of reduced funding
for equalities work,
particularly in regard to
representation in strategic
arenas.
No significant
disproportionate impact
identified but will discuss
ways to mitigate against
any yet unidentified
disproportionate impact
with providers.
Potential disproportionate
impact on Gay, Lesbian
and Bi Sexual
groups/individuals as a
result of reduced funding
to the equalities element
Specialist Support
services, particularly in
No significant
disproportionate impact
identified but will discuss
ways to mitigate against
any yet unidentified
disproportionate impact
with providers.
Please indicate high (H)
medium (M), low (L), no
effect (N) for each.
Age
(1) L (2) M (3) M
Disability
(1) M (2) L (3) L
Gender
reassignment
Race
(1) L (2) L (3) L
Religion/Belief
(1) L (2) L (3) L
Pregnancy and
maternity
Sexual Orientation
(1) L (2) L (3) L
(1) M (2) M (3) M
(1) L (2) L (3) L
No significant
disproportionate impact
identified but will discuss
ways to mitigate against
any yet unidentified
disproportionate impact
with providers.
regard to representation in
strategic arenas.
Sex
(1) L (2) L (3) L
Any other area
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?
Through variations to contract apply funding reductions in a way that retains the maximum potential front line
delivery of organisational development support.
No significant disproportionate impact identified but will discuss ways to mitigate against any yet unidentified
disproportionate impact with providers.
7. Based on the information in sections 2 to 6, should this
function/policy/procedure/practice or a decision proceed to
NO
Detailed Impact Assessment? (recommended if one or more H
under section 2)
Assessor signature:
Approved by:
Date approved:
Simon Baker
Dave Preston/Dave Moss
31 January 2013