Athena SWAN Bronze department award application
Name of university: University College London
Department: Institute for Global Health
Date of application: November 2014
Date of university Bronze and/or Silver SWAN award: University Bronze - 2006, renewed
2009, 2012
Contact for application: Dr Sarah Hawkes and Ms Faye Bassett
Email: s.hawkes@ucl.ac.uk
Telephone: 020 7905 2120 or 020 7905 2122
Departmental website address: www.ucl.ac.uk/igh
Athena SWAN Bronze Department awards recognise that in addition to university-wide
policies the department is working to promote gender equality and to address challenges
particular to the discipline.
Not all institutions use the term ‘department’ and there are many equivalent academic
groupings with different names, sizes and compositions. The definition of a ‘department’ for
SWAN purposes can be found on the Athena SWAN website. If in doubt, contact the Athena
SWAN Officer well in advance to check eligibility.
It is essential that the contact person for the application is based in the department.
Sections to be included
At the end of each section state the number of words used. Click here for additional guidance
on completing the template.
1.
Letter of endorsement from the head of department: maximum 500 words
An accompanying letter of endorsement from the head of department should explain how the
SWAN action plan and activities in the department contribute to the overall department
strategy and academic mission. The letter is an opportunity for the head of department to
confirm their support for the application and to endorse and commend any women and
1
UCL INSTITUTE FOR GLOBAL HEALTH
STEMM activities that have made a significant contribution to the achievement of the
departmental mission.
418 words
25th September 2014
Dear Ms Sarah Dickinson,
As Director of the Institute for Global Health, I give my full support and endorsement to our
Athena SWAN Bronze application, and I am personally engaged in the process to ensure that
women in our Institute are properly supported in their careers. As someone with a wife
working full-time in the National Health Service and three children, I am well aware of the
stresses and strains that working women face. Before we began this application I was
reasonably confident that our track record in attracting and supporting female staff and
students would stand us in good stead. However I have learnt much more about the need to
continuously monitor our performance with regards to career mentoring, appraisal, support
with gender issues, ensuring that the work life balance of female staff is protected, scheduling
meetings for times when women with children can easily attend, and in overcoming the
obstacles that women face in being fully represented on decision-making bodies and in
achieving promotion opportunities.
In applying for a Bronze award (as a new Institute) we do believe that IGH already has a strong
track record of family friendly working, and that our procedures are flexible and sensitive to
family life. However we cannot rest on our laurels. Two issues are of particular concern to me.
First, in our survey of staff attitudes our female staff were generally more dissatisfied with
procedures such as promotions than our men. Regardless of whether this is a statistically
significant finding we need an open and transparent process to ensure that any concerns are
openly expressed and speedily acted upon by the senior management team. We must be
constantly vigilant to ensure that female staff in our department have equal access and
encouragement for personal development opportunities, career breaks, sabbaticals,
representation on senior university committees, and for promotion. Our comprehensive
action plan hopes to address these issues, for example by encouraging more frequent
communication with line managers and looking to implement more mentorship relationships
within the department.
I have been greatly impressed by the commitment of our staff, led by Dr Sarah Hawkes and
Faye Bassett, in collating gender specific data, conducting an anonymous staff survey, and
raising important SWAN issues for discussion. I shall continue to take part in the Athena
SWAN process, and our work towards a Silver award, in order to ensure that Athena SWAN
principles and practice are at the heart of our Institute governance, and that we speedily
address any imbalances in order to support the careers for women.
Yours sincerely,
2
Professor Anthony Costello
Director, UCL Institute for Global Health
2.
The self-assessment process: maximum 1000 words
(895 words)
Describe the self-assessment process. This should include:
a)
A description of the self assessment team: members’ roles (both within the
department and as part of the team) and their experiences of work-life balance.
Our Athena SWAN self-assessment team (SAT) was formed in April 2014, when all
Institute for Global Health (IGH) staff were invited to volunteer for the SAT at a staff
meeting, and has since met 8 times. The final number included in the committee is
relatively small (4 female, 2 male) - a reflection of the size of our department (total
number of academic staff = 40). However, the team is diverse in terms of seniority and
expertise, with early career and mid-career as well as senior academics. The team also
includes clinical and non-clinical staff, administrative staff and PhD students.
Institute for Global Health SAT members:
 Chair: Dr Sarah Hawkes (Reader)
 Faye Bassett (Departmental Administrator and Personal Assistant to the
Director)
 Daniel Strachan (Senior Research Associate and PhD student)
 Jenny Hall (Research Fellow and PhD student)
 Michelle Heys (Clinical Lecturer)
 Professor Anthony Costello (Director, Institute for Global Health)
Team members represent a wide range of career histories, and several have worked in
other careers aside from academia (for example, clinical medicine and public health),
thus bringing a wide range of experience and inputs. Members of the SAT divided
responsibilities among themselves, including: conducting survey of staff
satisfaction/feedback (FB); review of parental leave policies and postgraduate students
(DS); review of undergraduate student data (JH); review of policies at departmental and
faculty levels (FB); review of staff employment positions and numbers (MH); overall coordination (SH).
All members of the team apart from one currently work full-time, but some have
worked part-time or taken career breaks in the past. All team members agreed that the
Institute for Global Health offers them an opportunity for flexible working hours, as
needed, and new parents on the team reported positive experience of parental leave.
Carer responsibilities include caring for young children as well as elderly parents, and
3
team members reported a supportive working culture within IGH that recognises the
need for flexibility when required.
b)
An account of the self assessment process: details of the self assessment team
meetings, including any consultation with staff or individuals outside of the university,
and how these have fed into the submission.
As a new Department, this was the first time we have applied for an Athena SWAN
award. Both at the time of initiating the application process, and as an ongoing input,
we have received support from the UCL Equalities and Diversity Team in preparation of
this application. The team has met regularly with the following objectives:
 Review the current IGH policies and practices from a gender perspective
 Review collated data for the Athena SWAN application
 Propose Actions based on the evidence gathered
Writing the application has been a collaborative process with inputs from all team
members. Team members also contributed and joined our team meetings via Skype
when working overseas.
We have presented data up to a cut-off point of early September 2014. Evidence
needed for the application was gathered from a variety of sources including staff and
student recruitment, retention, promotion and turnover data, and a review of existing
policies both at the level of the Department and across UCL more broadly. In addition
we sought input from all staff within IGH by administering an online survey to assess the
IGH working environment. Filtered by responses from academics, this survey was
completed by 10 women and 9 men in the Department (48% of academic staff).
Questions addressed: job satisfaction; experiences of gender-based discrimination;
perception of future career opportunities; and comments on work-life balance. This
survey was particularly important to assess the views of all staff in the Department –
since we are an Institute for Global Health many of our staff are based overseas either
permanently or for extended periods of time. Gathering the views of staff members who
are not often physically present in UCL was very important to us. This survey will be
repeated every 2 years in order to monitor and evaluate staff satisfaction over time
(Action 2.3).
c)
Plans for the future of the self assessment team, such as how often the team
will continue to meet, any reporting mechanisms and in particular how the self
assessment team intends to monitor implementation of the action plan.
We will meet on a twice a term basis in order to monitor progress towards our goals,
and plan for actions/changes needed to be able to apply for an Athena SWAN silver
award in the future. Membership of the SAT will be rotational, and all staff will be
offered an opportunity to join the team as spaces become available. Membership of the
SAT will be taken into consideration in reviews of internal citizenship during annual staff
appraisals (Action 6.1).
Progress towards our goals will be measured through annual reviews of the background
data for IGH staff and students. In addition, we plan to repeat the on-line staff
satisfaction survey at least every two years (Action 2.3). A particular focus of our future
4
SAT work will be on ensuring inclusivity for the members of staff (and research students)
who are based overseas (Action 6.2). We believe that this is an important goal as IGH
staff (and students) work in a wide variety of geographical and socio-cultural settings,
and are often based within other Institutions (i.e. outside of University College London).
Ensuring that our overseas colleagues are afforded the same opportunities for equity in
their working environments, and are supported to achieve their professional goals will
be an important part of our future actions.
Monitoring reports on Athena SWAN progress will be made available to all staff via our
Intranet, and in addition we will ensure that the reports are discussed at our regular
staff meetings (which overseas staff join by Skype whenever possible). For overseas staff
who are unable to join the staff meetings, we will seek feedback by email.
3.
A picture of the department: maximum 2000 words
Total word count = 1997
a)
Provide a pen-picture of the department to set the context for the application,
outlining in particular any significant and relevant features.
The UCL Institute for Global Health (IGH) is a relatively new department at UCL, and is a
diverse and dynamic place to work. Previously a unit under the Institute of Child Health
(known as the Centre for International Health and Development), the department
became officially independent in August 2013, although is still physically based within
the Institute of Child Health (which recently received an Athena SWAN Silver award).
Based within the Faculty of Population Health Sciences, the UCL Institute for Global
Health (IGH) is a thriving research and teaching community. IGH’s vision is for a world
where international policy on global health is informed by world class research. There
are three themes within IGH - Politics, Cultures and Economics; Population Health &
Health Systems; and Sustainability & Climate Change which collaborate with the shared
objective of improving the health of women, men and children on an international scale.
IGH is an interdisciplinary collaboration of leading academics working on health and
development in a global context. Our current programmes aim to promote the health,
nutrition and welfare of people in resource poor countries. Our research topics include
maternal and newborn health, nutrition and livelihoods, gender and health, violence
and health, children in difficult circumstances, child development and disability, HIV
prevention and treatment, and the evaluation of community interventions. Gender
specialists within IGH work to mainstream gender (focusing on gender to mean the
social roles and rules of behaviour for both women and men) into evidence-informed
health policy development. Our particular area of focus is on the development of gender
transformative approaches to addressing gender based violence and other health
concerns. Our theoretical understanding of gender has influenced and informed our
Athena SWAN SAT.
We have 40 academic staff members (57% of which are female and 43% male) with 9
based overseas. We also have 8 professional services staff members (87.5% female), and
a further 24 honorary staff members, who are evenly distributed in terms of gender. It
5
should be noted that we do not have our own HR personnel and still rely on receiving
this service, amongst other services, from UCL’s Institute of Child Health.
We reach around 230 students each year with our global health modules and
undergraduate and postgraduate programmes, and a further 350 UCL medical students
through our core teaching in the fourth year MBBS programme.
We endeavour to create a supportive and flexible environment with family friendly
policies, particularly for those based overseas, as we are conscious that some issues can
be exacerbated through being based outside the UK. At the Institute for Global Health,
it is key that our global outlook is represented in our staff diversity, and as such we are
strongly committed to keeping the principles of Athena SWAN at the core of our work.
(461 words)
b)
Provide data for the past three years (where possible with clearly labelled
graphical illustrations) on the following with commentary on their significance and how
they have affected action planning.
Student data
(i)
Numbers of males and females on access or foundation courses –
comment on the data and describe any initiatives taken to attract women to
the courses.
Not applicable – IGH only takes undergraduate intercalating medical students and
postgraduate students
(ii)
Undergraduate male and female numbers – full and part-time –
comment on the female:male ratio compared with the national picture for the
discipline. Describe any initiatives taken to address any imbalance and the
impact to date. Comment upon any plans for the future.
All our undergraduate students are full-time, the proportion and number of female
and male undergraduate students for the last three years is shown in Figure 1. We
have compared our student data with clinical medicine students as this is the pool
from which our students are drawn. Although there is a female majority in
undergraduate clinical medicine in the HESA data, the UCL MBBS degree has a female
to male ratio of 0.98 whereas ours is slightly higher at 1.46 for the last three years.
(85 words)
6
Figure 1: Proportion and number of male and female full time undergraduate
students for 2011/12 to 2013/14 compared to HESA clinical medicine data
100%
90%
80%
8
13
868
14
70%
20490
60%
50%
Male
40%
30%
Female
17
24
863
10
20%
25555
10%
0%
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
Institute of Global Health
2013/14
2013/14
UCL MBBS
HESA
(iii)
Postgraduate male and female numbers completing taught courses –
full and part-time – comment on the female:male ratio compared with the
national picture for the discipline. Describe any initiatives taken to address any
imbalance and the effect to date. Comment upon any plans for the future.
We have compared ourselves to national data for postgraduate taught courses in
‘Development Studies’. Our postgraduate taught courses have consistently had more
female than male students completing them - similar to national level postgraduate
taught courses - see Figure 2.
7
Figure 2: Proportion of male and female postgraduate students completing studies
from 2011/12 to 2013/14 compared to HESA data for Development Studies
100%
90%
5
7
19
250
80%
70%
60%
Male
50%
40%
52
46
Female
48
460
30%
20%
10%
0%
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
HESA
We do not currently have data on completion by full and part time status, only
enrolment as shown in Figure 3. We will start collecting this data so that it can be
monitored (Action 1.1).
Figure 3: Proportion and number of postgraduate taught students enrolling full-time
or part-time by gender for 2011/12 – 2013/14
100%
90%
80%
4
27
4
30
5
32
70%
60%
50%
Male
40%
30%
15
49
6
54
Female
9
33
20%
10%
0%
Full time Part time Full time Part time Full time Part time
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
8
Given the gender imbalance in our student numbers, we aim to increase the
recruitment of men to our courses (Action 1.2). We believe that this is important as
our students will become future leaders in global health and development, and should
reflect a gender-balanced environment. As a first step will administer an online survey
with current students to investigate their perceptions of why the gender imbalance in
recruitment exists (Action 1.2.1). Likely activities to address the imbalance will include:
reviewing the recruitment literature for students (e.g. on websites, promotional
materials, etc.) and a review of programme marketing; and a review of the programme
materials to ensure that they are gender-balanced (Action 1.2.2). In addition we will
review recruitment criteria and processes to ensure that these are not contributing to
the imbalance (Action 1.2.3). Furthermore we will benchmark our student profile
against other global health programmes in the UK - there are over 20 global and public
health institutions that we will contact for this. (Action 1.2.5). Information gleaned
from this process will be used to set a target and devise a strategy to improve the
gender balance of our postgraduate taught courses (Action 1.2.6).
(269 words)
(iv)
Postgraduate male and female numbers on research degrees – full and
part-time – comment on the female:male ratio compared with the national
picture for the discipline. Describe any initiatives taken to address any
imbalance and the effect to date. Comment upon any plans for the future.
We have 20 current research degree students with a female: male ratio of 1.5. Seven
of the 20 are enrolled part-time, four men and three women. Enrolments for the last
three academic years are shown in Table 1 and have a female: male ratio of 1.6, highly
comparable with postgraduate research students in subjects allied to medicine at 1.57
in the HESA data for 2012/13. Of the seven enrolled before 2011-12 three are parttime (two male, one female).
Several of the part-time PhD students are often also working as research staff; this
opportunity seems to have been taken up by more men than women. In the first
instance we will seek to understand why this is by surveying principal investigators and
female project staff to understand any barriers that may be preventing women
working on research projects from registering for PhDs and develop a plan to address
this (Action 1.3). As part of this action we will also raise awareness of the part-time
PhD opportunities for all research staff in order to improve equity in access.
(176 words)
9
Table 1: Postgraduate research degree students enrolled since the establishment of
the department
(v)
Ratio of course applications to offers and acceptances by gender for
undergraduate, postgraduate taught and postgraduate research degrees –
comment on the differences between male and female application and success
rates and describe any initiatives taken to address any imbalance and their
effect to date. Comment upon any plans for the future.
Undergraduate
The department plays no role in undergraduate recruitment – medical students are
allocated to us up to a pre-defined fixed number. The gender balance on the
undergraduate degree is therefore determined by external factors.
The department takes a small number of ‘affiliates’ each year. These are external
students who join one or more modules. The applications, offers and acceptances for
these affiliate students for the last academic year are shown in Table 2. We only have
one year of data available for these students – a reflection of our only being a separate
institute for the past one academic year.
Table 2: Affiliate student applications, offers and acceptances for external
undergraduate students 2013/14
Entry year ->
Female
Male
Female:Male
2013/14
Applications
6
2
3:1
Offers
4
1
4:1
Accepted
2
1
2:1
Postgraduate taught
Over the last three years the number of applicants has remained stable at between
150 and 170. Our postgraduate taught courses have consistently had more female
applicants, offers and acceptances than male as seen in Figure 4.
10
Figure 3: Number of applications, offers and acceptances for postgraduate taught
courses by gender for the last three years
100%
90%
54
30
14
44
30
16
170
98
56
153
115
87
80%
62
43
25
160
97
55
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
Male
Female
20%
10%
2011/12
2012/13
Acceptances
Offers
Applications
Acceptances
Offers
Applications
Acceptances
Offers
Applications
0%
2013/14
Overall the ratio of offers to applications is the same for both genders (64%) however,
men are less likely to accept the offer than women– see Table 3. We will explore
reasons why men are less likely to accept offers for postgraduate study – e.g. through
interviews with men who are offered courses but do not take up places. We will use
the findings to plan for any changes to achieve more gender-balanced student uptake
(Action 1.2.4).
Table 3: Applications, offers and acceptance ratios for postgraduate taught courses.
2011/12
Offer:
Application
Acceptance:
Application
2012/13
2013/14
Total
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
0.58
0.56
0.75
0.68
0.61
0.69
0.64
0.64
0.57
0.47
0.76
0.53
0.57
0.58
0.64
0.53
Postgraduate research
There are several routes through which a student may apply for a PhD in the
department, most of which are informal and as such we do not have data on
applicants, offers and acceptances. A PhD working group was set up in mid 2014 and
one of its tasks is to clarify the processes for applying for a PhD in the department. We
have already ensured SAT representation on the PhD working group and the PhD
recruitment data will be monitored regularly (Action: 1.4).
11
(vi)
Degree classification by gender – comment on any differences in
degree attainment between males and females and describe what actions are
being taken to address any imbalance.
Undergraduate
Over the last three years the degree class obtained by female undergraduates seems
to have been clustered at an Upper Second, with 91% (39 of 43) achieving this grade as
shown in Table 4. The grades for male students have been more widely distributed male students are more likely to get either a First or a classification below an Upper
Second, see Figure 5.
Table 4: Degree class obtained by undergraduates by gender
Degree Class Attained - Undergraduate
award year 2011 2012 2013
First
First
Upper
Second
Upper
Second
Other
Other
Total
Female
Male
Female
2
2
14
1
1
15
0
3
10
3
6
39
%
of
gender
7%
14%
91%
% of total
Male
15
7
9
31
74%
36%
Female
Male
0
3
1
0
0
2
1
5
2%
12%
1%
6%
4%
7%
46%
Figure 4: Undergraduate degree class by gender for the years 2011-13 combined
100%
1
90%
5
80%
70%
60%
50%
39
31
40%
Other
Upper Second
First
30%
20%
10%
0%
3
Female
6
Male
Postgraduate taught
For postgraduate taught students women are more likely to achieve a distinction than
men, who are most likely to receive a pass followed by a merit as shown in Table 5 and
Figure 6.
12
Table 5: Degree class obtained by postgraduates by gender
Degree Class Attained - Postgraduate taught courses
award year 2011 2012 2013
Total
->
Distinction
Female
5
10
8
23
Distinction
Male
1
1
2
Merit
Female
11
17
19
47
Merit
Male
8
1
3
12
Pass
Female
26
26
29
81
Pass
Male
10
5
3
18
%
of
gender
15%
6%
31%
38%
54%
56%
% of
total
13%
1%
26%
7%
44%
10%
Figure 5: Postgraduate degree classification by gender for degrees awarded from
2011 - 2013
100%
90%
80%
70%
81
18
60%
Pass
50%
Merit
40%
30%
Distinction
47
12
20%
10%
23
0%
Female
2
Male
Postgraduate research
There have been six PhD theses submitted over the last three years, three by men and
three by women. The median time to submission is 3.9 years. Women tend to submit
before men (median 3.5 years versus 4.5 years) but this is probably only because one
male student took almost 7 years to submit, skewing the data. Overall there does not
seem to be any obvious imbalance in Figure 7.
13
Figure 6: Average time to submission (years) of PhD thesis by gender and year of
submission
8
7
6
Years
5
4
3
2
1
0
M
F
2012
M
F
M
2013
F
2014
We will continue to monitor these data on an annual basis, and will ensure that the
results are discussed both at general staff meetings and within the teaching staff
meetings – thereby providing an opportunity to discuss trends with time and identify
any potential problem areas (Action 1.5).
(494 words)
(vii) Female:male ratio of academic staff and research staff – researcher,
lecturer, senior lecturer, reader, professor (or equivalent). comment on any
differences in numbers between males and females and say what action is
being taken to address any underrepresentation at particular grades/levels
As a new department we do not have data for the last three years, only current data.
We will implement a new data monitoring system for staff numbers so that we are
able to review these data annually (Action 2.1).
There are 40 members of staff covering all six UCL Athena SWAN categories. Of these
40, 23 are female and 17 are male - see Table 6 and Figure 8. For each of the six SWAN
categories the ratios are neutral or in favour of females for every level except for at
Professorial level (Figure 8). Taken together the gender ratio in the top three levels,
representing 25% of the department, is neutral.
Table 6: Breakdown of staff by gender across the Athena SWAN grades
SWAN Category
Title
Key
Male
Female
F:M ratio
14
1
2
Professor or equivalent
Reader or equivalent
Senior
Lecturer/Principal
Research or equivalent
Lecturer/Senior Researcher
or equivalent
Post Doc/Researcher or
equivalent
Research
Assistant
or
equivalent
3
4
5
6
Total
2
1
1
1
0.50
1.00
2
3
1.50
7
8
1.14
3
8
2.67
2
17
2
23
1.00
1.35
Figure 7: Number of male and female staff by SWAN category
SWAN Category 1
2
SWAN Category 2
1 1
SWAN Category 3
2
1
3
Male
SWAN Category 4
7
SWAN Category 5
8
3
SWAN Category 6
2
Female
8
2
0
5
10
15
20
Figure 8: Proportion of male and female staff at each SWAN category
100%
90%
80%
70%
1
2
8
8
60%
3
1
50%
Female
40%
30%
20%
10%
2
2
7
3
2
1
Male
50%
0%
SWAN
SWAN
SWAN
SWAN
SWAN
SWAN
Category Category Category Category Category Category
6
5
4
3
2
1
15
Compared to staff HESA data for health and community studies we have a marginally
more favourable female:male ratio at professorial level than the national picture. Staff
HESA for health and community studies data from 2012/13 shows that at the professor
level the female: male is 0.46 whereas for our department it is 0.5, although this is in
part due to the fact that there are only three professors in our department. For all
other levels (1-5) combined our department’s female: male is 1.47 which, while more
females than males, is lower than the national ratio of 2.20. For the whole department
(levels 1-6) our female: male is 1.35, even lower than the national ratio of 2.20.
Currently the most gender imbalanced staff grade is post-doc level - the ratio of
female: male staff is 2.67:1. We will explore with all staff their perceptions of the
reasons why men are under-represented at the lower levels, and will formulate
strategies based on the findings (Action 2.2). We have proposed a programme of
activities designed to support women through their academic careers and ensure they
have an equitable opportunity to apply for promotion – see Section 4.b in particular.
Turnover by grade and gender – comment on any differences between men and
women in turnover and say what is being done to address this. Where the number of
staff leaving is small, comment on the reasons why particular individuals left.
Only four members of staff have left since 2011, one male and three female, shown in
Table 10. Most recently, two female research assistants (Athena SWAN grade 6) and
one female research associate (Athena SWAN grade 5) at the end of their fundinglimited term contracts. In 2011, a male teaching fellow (Athena SWAN grade 4)
resigned.
We believe it is important to address the reasons why staff leave UCL when their
funding-limited contracts come to an end - and recognise that in our Department this
has affected a small number of employees but more women than men. We propose
the following actions to address this:






Raise awareness in the Department that short term contracts are due to finish
(e.g. through regular review of contract end-dates at Senior Management Team
meetings (Action 3.7);
Encourage recruitment to new posts (project or core-funded) from existing
staff pool (Action 3.7);
provide more support for early career staff to apply for personal fellowships
(Action 3.7);
Encourage early career staff to be part of the recently launched UCL
Populations and Lifelong Health Domain Early Careers Network (Action 3.7);
Ensure that new staff posts are advertised as having working conditions which
are gender-aware (e.g. through mention of family-friendly policies, flexible
working hours, etc.) (Action 3.2);
Ensuring that all current staff are aware of our culture of flexible working hours
and promoting parental leave, thus ensuring that staff never feel that they
cannot achieve a healthy work/life balance (Action 3.7).
16
(512 words)
Table 7: Staff turnover by grade and gender
Position
Status
Full
time
Full
time
Full
time
Full
time
Sex
Male
Female
Female
Female
4.
SWAN
Grade
Leaving Reason
6
Resignation
Year
2011
End of Fixed Term
Contract
End of Fixed Term
Contract
End of Fixed Term
Contract
5
4
4
2012
2013
2013
Supporting and advancing women’s careers: maximum 5000 words
Total 4992 words
Key career transition points
Provide data for the past three years (where possible with clearly labelled graphical
illustrations) on the following with commentary on their significance and how they
have affected action planning.
a.
Job application and success rates by gender and grade – comment on any
differences in recruitment between men and women at any level and say what action
is being taken to address this.
During the past three years, there have been 10 job hires in the department.
Application and success rates by grade and gender are given in Figure 10 and Table 8.
Figure 10: Gender in numbers of applications, shortlisting and success 2011-14
100%
0
90%
39
80%
70%
21
7
6
3
60%
50%
6
40%
70
30%
20%
17
16
Male
Female
6
1
10%
0%
Applicants Interview
Appoint Applicants Interview
SWAN categories 2, 3 and 4
Appoint
SWAN categories 5 and 6
17
Table 8: Female and male success ratios
SWAN
Ratio
category Female
applications
to
shortlisting
Ratio male
applications
to
shortlisting
Ratio
Ratio males
females
interviewed:
interviewed: success
success
2,3,4
2.8:1
3.5:1
6:1
2:1
5,6
4.4:1
5.6:1
2.7:1
0
A review of the data in Tables 7 and 8 highlights a number of issues that require
addressing:
 In four of the 10 job hires no men were shortlisted for the post – mainly for more
junior posts
 Women had a lower rate of success when interviewed for more senior posts
 While more women were hired than men overall (7 women, 3 men), all 3 men were
hired at more senior grades
 All junior-level hires were filled by women
These data indicate a potential gender-imbalance in the job hiring system. Checks and
balances are already in place – for example, under UCL rules (which we follow) interview
panels must include both men and women; and under the rules of our Department, all
staff should complete Online Diversity Training programme (Action 4.7). However, we
will address identified problems thus: Actions 3.1: promoting gender equity in the
shortlisting as far as possible (for example, requiring a written explanation to the Head
of Department and the SAT of why the shortlists only have candidates from one gender
if such a situation arises in the future, and ensuring shortlisting panels are gender
balanced); reviewing senior hire processes to promote gender equity – ensuring, for
example, that women are encouraged to apply for more senior positions through job
advertisements that encourage women to apply, promote family friendly policies, and
mention job flexibility (Action 3.2). We will also recommend that all staff involved in
recruitment, including interview panel members, attend unconscious bias training
courses (Action 3.2).
b.
Applications for promotion and success rates by gender and grade – comment
on whether these differ for men and women and if they do explain what action may be
taken. Where the number of women is small applicants may comment on specific
examples of where women have been through the promotion process. Explain how
potential candidates are identified.
Over the past year (for which we have data available, the previous data is not available
to us as it occurred before we were a new Department) there have been 7 applications
18
for promotion, and all 7 have been successful. Three were female members of staff who
were successfully promoted from lecturer to senior lecturer – although one was
successful only on her second attempt.
To date, there has been a relative lack of transparency in the senior promotion
processes – eligibility criteria have not been clear to staff. Action 4.3: all line managers
and individual staff will receive details of eligibility for promotion. Managers and staff
will be encouraged to meet and discuss promotion prospects and processes before the
deadlines for promotion.
For each of the areas below, explain what the key issues are in the department, what
steps have been taken to address any imbalances, what success/impact has been
achieved so far and what additional steps may be needed.
(i)
Recruitment of staff – comment on how the department’s recruitment
processes ensure that female candidates are attracted to apply, and how the
department ensures its short listing, selection processes and criteria comply with the
university’s equal opportunities policies
The strength of our reputation is reflected in the high number of applicants to our
advertised posts: 147 applicants to 10 posts, and 59% of the applicants were women.
However, as the analysis above (Tables 7 and 8) has highlighted, for more senior
positions, women are being shortlisted at similar rates to men, but had a lower rate of
success at interview. Action is needed not just at the level of the interview itself, but
prior to the interview at job advertising to promote applications from highly qualified
women candidates. Actions: ensure that all job adverts mention that IGH is family
friendly, encourages women to apply, and promotes job flexibility (Actions 3.2); ensure
that all interview panels are gender balanced; ensure that all staff on interview panels
have undertaken the HR recruitment a selection policy briefing, which includes
information on the Equality Act, as well as the online equality and diversity training
(Action 4.7); promote an annual review of recruitment data through the SAT and make
results available to all staff (Action 3.5).
(ii)
Support for staff at key career transition points – having identified key
areas of attrition of female staff in the department, comment on any interventions,
programmes and activities that support women at the crucial stages, such as personal
development training, opportunities for networking, mentoring programmes and
leadership training. Identify which have been found to work best at the different career
stages.
19
We have very low rates of staff turnover, but the key point of attrition is at the end of a
short term contract (research assistant/associate) – where many posts are occupied by
women, particularly recent post-doctoral students from IGH. Lack of funding means that
once project-specific funds come to an end, there is no core funding to continue
employment. In order to overcome this loss of talented young researchers, we plan to
undertake the following actions in addition to those outlined in Actions 3.2 and 3.7:
 Ensuring that all staff have the opportunity for mentorship. We plan to
promote a mentorship scheme, particularly targeting PhD students and junior
level research staff (Action 4.5).
 Encouraging all PIs and senior research staff to include existing members of
staff on their grant applications (Action 3.7)
There have only been two promotions to Professorial level (one woman, one man) in
the past 3 years. However, we have a number of staff in IGH who will be eligible for
promotion in the coming years, including to Professorial appointments. We plan to
encourage women at more senior levels (Senior Lecturer and above) through the
following:


Women encouraged to join UCL’s Future Leaders scheme – we have nominated one
senior female academic to this leadership training scheme (Action 3.6).
Improve the communication of the UCL promotions procedure, and improve the
support available for staff working towards a promotion, (Action 4.3).
Career development
a)
For each of the areas below, explain what the key issues are in the department,
what steps have been taken to address any imbalances, what success/impact has been
achieved so far and what additional steps may be needed.
(i)
Promotion and career development– comment on the appraisal and career
development process, and promotion criteria and whether these take into consideration
responsibilities for teaching, research, administration, pastoral work and outreach work;
is quality of work emphasised over quantity of work?
Appraisals
All staff are required to complete the formal UCL appraisal form which covers recent
achievements, future objectives, training needs etc. - with the 2013/14 completion rate
at 100%. However, feedback from both men and women in the staff survey (July 2014)
indicated that staff felt the appraisal was ‘not clear’, ‘should focus more on specific
actions’, and ‘should be more geared towards promotion’. In response to this, IGH will
develop a short document to guide appraisers (Action 4.1).
Several staff felt that once a year was too infrequent. We aim to instigate 6-monthly
voluntary informal catch-up sessions (between individuals and their appraisers) with an
emphasis on career progression planning and discussion of work-life balance. A one
20
page form will be drawn up in order to prompt discussion across a range of career
development areas, and take-up of this system will be monitored (Action 4.2).
Promotion
University College London and the Faculty of Population Health Sciences have clear
guidance and criteria for academic career progression. Both junior promotions (for up to
UCL grade 8) and senior promotions (for UCL grades 9 and 10) are now reviewed
annually by a Faculty panel to ensure equity of treatment, and all applications must be
submitted by a set deadline.
Everyone is invited to put themselves forward for promotion if they wish (but are
encouraged to discuss this with their line manager first), and potential applicants are
reviewed at the IGH Senior Management Team (SMT) meeting. Individuals may be
approached if the SMT feel that certain staff members would have a good chance of
being successful yet did not express their interest in being considered for promotion.
This is important as our staff survey indicated that staff members do not always feel
encouraged to apply (Figure 11) and some have actually been discouraged. This year the
IGH Senior Management Team received, for the first time, details of all staff members
eligible for promotions/increments– thus enabling action to be taken to ensure equity in
opportunity to apply for promotion.
Applications are evaluated by the IGH promotions panel (established last year, with M:F
ratio of panel members 2:1). A terms of reference document will be drawn up to clarify
the membership of future IGH promotions panel to ensure there is gender balance. The
document will ensure that the panel is rotated so as to ensure membership is fair
(Action 4.4).
Figure 11 – Charts to show what proportion of survey respondents felt that had been
encouraged or discouraged from applying for promotion
23.5
41%
41%
59%
59%
76.5
Reviewing these encouragement/discouragement survey statistics more closely, and
from the 10 people who reported that they had been encouraged to apply for
promotion, 80% were male and 20% female. Conversely, from the 4 people who felt
that had been previously discouraged from applying for promotion, 75% were female.
These numbers are, of course, from a small number base (N=14), and differences may
21
not be statistically significant, however, we are concerned by the feedback and hope the
new mechanism for reviewing staff promotion will have a positive influence.
The need for more transparency was highlighted by staff survey results which found that
40% of women disagreed that they have the same opportunities for promotion as
others with the same abilities and experience – a figure that was significantly less
negative from men (22%). We aim to make the promotions process more transparent,
with eligibility considered fairly and consistently with clear guidance circulated to all
(Action 4.3) and mentioned at all staff meetings. We will also encourage more planning
for promotion, both in terms of individuals and as line managers/appraisers (Action 4.1).
Staff will be encouraged to attend a UCL promotions workshop - for support and
guidance (Action 4.3).
We will also promote more training courses for line managers. One comment from the
staff survey suggested that ‘it would help if line managers attend relevant training
courses in people management (or related courses) so they keep abreast of the latest
requirements at UCL that staff need to be aware of especially on promotions.’
Therefore, we will aim to publicise (and make mandatory for managers) the UCL course
‘Best Practice in People Management’ to familiarise line managers with UCL policies and
procedures including that which relates to promotions (Action 4.5). Appraisal training
will also be flagged as mandatory (Action 4.5)
We have recently added links to explain the Faculty promotions procedures (both junior
and senior) including deadlines that need to be abided by, to our intranet site under
Human Resources. This is accessible to all staff and will also be brought to their
attention via email in advance of the promotions rounds beginning.
Through the more stringent appraisal process and transparent promotions procedure,
we hope to encourage and support more female staff to apply for promotion, as
encouragement is what they seem to be, quite crucially, lacking (Action 4.1, 4.2, 4.3).
Mentoring
We see mentoring as an important part of the academic support process. Our staff
survey results showed that 100% of all academic respondents did not currently have an
official mentor or that they ‘didn’t know’ whether they had a mentor. Yet 63% stated
that they had an informal mentor, or someone they could turn to for advice.
There appears to be a substantial interest (61%) for more mentoring support from
senior staff members who are not line managers (with an additional 22% undecided).
The survey also showed that most people would be happy to be a mentor for someone
else (74% of respondents indicated this).
We will review existing UCL initiatives to increase participation in mentoring (Action
4.6). A summary will then be sent to the SMT to discuss how the Institute can best
support mentoring practice.
In addition, we will create a webpage with ‘IGH Academic Role Models’ once our
revamped website is available. This will feature a diverse range of staff who will talk
22
about their motivations and experiences, suggesting that they could be contacted for
potential mentorship (Action 4.7). The hope is that this will provide inspiration for junior
level academics/applicants and well as facilitating more mentor/mentee relationships.
(i)
Induction and training – describe the support provided to new staff at all
levels, as well as details of any gender equality training. To what extent are good
employment practices in the institution, such as opportunities for networking, the
flexible working policy, and professional and personal development opportunities
promoted to staff from the outset?
Induction
New staff starting at IGH meet with their line manager on their first day to discuss, not
only the job scope, but also opportunities for flexible working, and other individual
requirements. The ‘essential information for new starters’ page on the IGH intranet
provides key information on working policies and guidance (including parental leave,
flexible working, etc.) – thus ensuring consistency in information access for all new staff.
It also notes that new staff are required to complete the equality and diversity online
training within their first 6 weeks.
However, we have noted that the current induction procedure does not provide
detailed information about existing opportunities for professional networking and
mentoring. We believe that the 6 monthly catch-up meetings with line managers
(Action 4.2) will provide an opportunity for extra guidance in terms of career
development and mentorship possibilities.
We have a prominent noticeboard in the department which focuses on work-life
balance and initiatives offered by UCL. This includes details of the UCL Employee
Assistance Programme (also part of the induction pages on the intranet), the UCL
Parents and Carers Together Network (PACT) and the UCL Union Rights & Advice centre.
The aim is to make as much of this information accessible to staff as possible. There is
also a virtual noticeboard on the intranet pages with similar information for those who
are based overseas.
Training
Every member of staff is required to undertake at least three training sessions per year
- a fact flagged up on the IGH intranet induction pages and a list of recommended
courses is outlined. This sets the expectation that professional development should be a
continuous and life-long process. All training is recorded online and is reviewed as part
of the annual appraisal.
This year, IGH updated the appraisal documentation to include a question asking
whether the UCL Online Diversity Training Module had been completed, and if not, a
target date is to be set. This has helped to improve our staff completion rates overall –
see Figure 12 - but will continue to be promoted throughout the year (Action 4.8).
23
The Senior Management Team has recommended that all managerial staff should
attend Unconscious Bias Training within the next year and this will be reportable in their
appraisals. Course dates will be widely publicised through emails, the intranet, and
departmental noticeboard, as well as at staff meetings (Action 4.5).
Figure 12: A graph to show completion rates of the UCL Online Diversity Training
Module over time in 2014 and by gender
8
7
6
3
5
4
3
Female participants
2
Male participants
2
4
1
0
0
1
0
2
0
1
1
0
1
0
PhD Students
The IGH PhD support network was established this year, and has since created an IGH
specific welcome pack for new PhD students. Our PhD students have access to a peer
mentoring scheme, for which handbooks have been made available. Mentors are fellow
PhD students in the writing up phase and who have been specifically trained to mentor
others.
Moreover, the annual departmental research “in-week” (a review week for all staff) is
an opportunity for facilitating informal connections and networking opportunities
between junior staff/ PhD students and more senior staff, whilst presenting their
current research.
(ii)
Support for female students
Describe the support (formal and informal) provided for female students to
enable them to make the transition to a sustainable academic career,
particularly from postgraduate to researcher, such as mentoring, seminars and
pastoral support and the right to request a female personal tutor. Comment on
whether these activities are run by female staff and how this work is formally
recognised by the department.
24
IGH has a gender neutral strategy regarding the provision of support for students. Post
graduate students have their application processed by the teaching coordinator who,
as a result, has an appreciation for their circumstances. Given the international
makeup of the IGH student body this becomes significant as students experience
challenges with, for instance, workload, financial stress or on occasions, issues at home
(often abroad). The teaching coordinator is often the first person to whom students
turn to when they have an issue, and can point students in the direction of the many
support services available through UCL (e.g. counselling, housing, financial) as well as
within IGH. Support is available from tutors for more general support (each student is
assigned an IGH tutor) and supervisors for more technical support. While tutors and
supervisors are not obliged to play a pastoral role, they do commonly offer advice,
support and referral as required.
A support network primarily for PhD and post-doctoral researchers – the ‘Early Careers
Network’ – has been recently launched (September 2014). Sitting within the UCL
Populations and Lifelong Health Domain and initiated by an IGH academic staff
member, the Early Careers Network is in the early stages of its development but aims
to provide a forum for addressing the core career development needs of researchers.
In addition to talks from role models, the forum will provide networking opportunities
as well as other member generated initiatives. Finally, we are in the process of
allocating funding for PhD students to go to conferences and undertake training. This
will be advertised in the hope that students will be more proactive about their own
professional development. We will monitor these initiatives using genderdisaggregated data and identify any issues needing action.
Organisation and culture
Female: male ratio of academic and research staff on fixed-term contacts and openended (permanent) contracts – comment on any differences between male and
female staff representation on fixed term contracts and say what is being done to
address them
UCL rarely uses fixed term contracts – staff on research grants are on ‘open ended
with a funding end date’ contracts – in practice this means their role ends when their
funding ends, but having an open ended contract means research staff have the same
opportunities and benefits as other staff. Most of our staff (59%) hold these funding
limited contracts. Table 9 shows male and female employment in terms of funding
limited or non-funding limited contracts. Staff employed on funding limited contracts
are more likely to be female (65%). This reflects a higher overall proportion of female
junior staff (Table 10).
Obtaining non-funding limited contracts continues to be a challenge in academia. We
will ensure that early career researchers are supported at transition points through a
variety of actions (3.2, 3.7, 4.6) to promote their continued careers in academic
research – particularly as they transition from project-funded to core-funded posts.
25
Table 9: Academic, Research and Teaching Staff at IGH by Type of Contract (20132014)
Contract type
Gende
r
Numbe
r
%
Funding limited contracts
F
15
65.2%
M
8
34.8%
F
8
47.1%
M
9
52.9%
Non-funding limited contracts
Table 10: Percentage female staff, staff with non-funding limited
contracts and female staff with non-funding limited contracts by SWAN
category
SWAN
category
%
female
% of all non- % of female
funding limited non-funding
limited
contracts
1
33.3%
100.0%
100.0%
2
50.0%
100.0%
100.0%
3
60.0%
100.0%
100.0%
4
53.3%
46.7%
42.9%
5
66.7%
0.0%
0.0%
SWAN category: 1: Professor or equivalent; 2: Reader or
Senior Lecturer; 3: Lecturer/ Senior researcher or
equivalent; 4: Postdoc researcher or equivalent; 5:
Research assistant or equivalent
Male and female representation on committees – provide a breakdown by committee
and explain any differences between male and female representation. Explain how
potential members are identified.
IGH has 5 departmental committees: Senior Management Team (SMT); Research Ethics
Committee; PhD working group; IGH Postgraduate exam board and Exam board for iBSc in
26
Global Health. There are 8 members of staff in the IGH senior management team, 5 of
whom are women. However, overall, 56% of all representation on committees is by male
staff.
The SAT reviewed representation on all other UCL committees by staff in IGH, among 19
members of the academic staff. Ten of the 19 staff sit on 1 or 2 committees, 2 sit on 3
committees and 6 sit on 3 or more committees (this includes internal IGH, UCL and
external committees). This is summarised in Table 11:
Table 11: Membership of UCL committees by gender
Women
Men
Membership of 1 or 2 committees
4
7
Membership of 3 committees
2
1
Membership of 4 or more committees
4
2
Totals
10
10
As Table 11 shows, there is good representation by men and women across a number of
decision-making committees. However, the SAT team felt that the balance of committee
participation was weighted in a top-heavy manner. If the total number of committees that
IGH staff participate in is reviewed (N=63 memberships), two senior male staff occupy 18
of the 63 membership places (almost 30%).
There has not previously been any formal system to ensure gender balance on
Committees. Staff are encouraged to put themselves forwards for Committees and midcareer junior researchers are given the opportunity to sit on Senior Management
Committees. We will ensure staff are encouraged to sit on committees and committee
membership and opportunities will be published on the intranet (Action 5.1).
a)
For each of the areas below, explain what the key issues are in the department,
what steps have been taken to address any imbalances, what success/impact has been
achieved so far and what additional steps may be needed.
(i)
Representation on decision-making committees – comment on
evidence of gender equality in the mechanism for selecting representatives.
What evidence is there that women are encouraged to sit on a range of
influential committees inside and outside the department? How is the issue of
‘committee overload’ addressed where there are small numbers of female
staff?
While representation on committees appears to be relatively gender-neutral, the data
are somewhat skewed by two (male) members of staff who occupy almost 30% of all the
committee memberships within the Department. In order to address this imbalance, we
have already circulated an email to inform all staff that representation on committees
can be co-opted – in the hope that more staff will be encouraged to apply for
membership. In addition, we propose the following actions (Action 5.1)
27
 The committee membership list is made available to all staff on the Intranet
 Membership be made available to a wider range of staff - e.g. through: limits
to the numbers of committees any one member of staff should ideally sit on;
rotation systems so that membership is time-limited and then made open to other
eligible members of staff; senior staff encouraged to delegate membership to more
junior staff
 New requests for committee membership are recorded centrally
 A shadowing system is set up so that junior staff are encouraged to shadow
senior staff as they attend committee meetings.
(ii)
Workload model – describe the systems in place to ensure that workload
allocations, including pastoral and administrative responsibilities (including the
responsibility for work on women and science) are taken into account at appraisal and in
promotion criteria. Comment on the rotation of responsibilities e.g. responsibilities with
a heavy workload and those that are seen as good for an individual’s career.
IGH does not have a workload model, as such, but for all staff their participation in
internal (and often external) citizenship activities is taken into account during their
appraisal. Our review of committee membership has highlighted some areas for action see above, Action 5.1. Teaching responsibilities are collated and analysed at the end of
every academic year by our team of dedicated teaching-track staff. To date, these data
have not been disaggregated by gender, but we will encourage this in the future (Action
5.3).
(iii)
Timing of departmental meetings and social gatherings – provide evidence of
consideration for those with family responsibilities, for example what the department
considers to be core hours and whether there is a more flexible system in place.
For several years, departmental meetings, and more recently social gatherings, have
been scheduled during core working hours of 10:00-16:00 as far as possible. The SAT has
recommended to the Senior Management Team that staff meetings are shifted from
lunch-hour to 10am in order to ensure that we hold staff meetings during core working
hours for our overseas-based staff too (who are mainly based in South Asia). This
proposal was accepted. However, key lectures and talks have tended to be scheduled at
the end of the working day. We believe that this is detrimental to the participation of
members of staff (female or male) who have responsibilities as carers. In order to
address this we have sent communications to all staff who organise lectures/talks and
requested that these are scheduled, as far as possible, during working hours. If talks are
to be held outside of working hours then these should be made available online if
possible (Action 5.2).
We have reviewed data on the gender of speakers invited to give lectures in the
department (data presented in Table 12). Only 3 internal speakers have been requested
to give talks, but 30 external speakers have been invited. Of the 30 external speakers, 20
(67%) were male.
28
Table 12 - speakers invited to give talks in the department, by gender
Lecture or Number
of Number
of
symposium female
female
presenters
- presenters
–
from
invited
from
department
outside
Number of male
presenters
from
department
Number of male
presenters
–
invited
from
outside
Totals
1
20
2
10
Table 12 highlights the need to push for more equitable gender representation in talks
by “experts” – usually talks which are well-attended by students and staff alike. We
believe that it is important to address the imbalance in our current model, and have
already met with those staff responsible for organising external speakers to ensure that
they promote more female speaker participation (Action 5.2).
(iii) Culture –demonstrate how the department is female-friendly and inclusive.
‘Culture’ refers to the language, behaviours and other informal interactions that
characterise the atmosphere of the department, and includes all staff and students.
As the Institute for Global Health, concepts of equality, equity, inclusivity and nondiscrimination lie at the heart of the work we do – globally, at national levels, and within
the working of the department itself. We believe that the working culture of IGH is
flexible, family-friendly, supportive and responsive to the needs of individuals working
here. We work in collaboration with several departments across UCL, and promote our
ideals and ways of working with other departments too (e.g. persuading them to hold
meetings during core working hours). Our core working hours are 10:00-16:00, but we
are aware that our staff based outside the UK are in different time zones and we are
moving towards a model of holding meetings at times that suit everyone’s core hours no
matter where based.
Interactions between all staff are on first-name terms – a reflection of the environment
and the small numbers enabling us to offer support to each other in our working lives.
We have a shared common area (with kitchen) which is used by all staff at breaks and
lunch-hours, and our staff meetings include the provision of lunch in order to encourage
attendance. We have informal staff meetings fortnightly with a cake rota, and the rota
to keep the kitchen area clean and tidy includes every single member irrespective of
grade/seniority.
We are a small department based on one floor of a UCL building, and within our
common areas we have both professional activity notice boards as well as a “news”
board with details of staff news on a more personal level (new babies, weddings, etc.)
(iv)
Outreach activities – comment on the level of participation by female and male
staff in outreach activities with schools and colleges and other centres. Describe who
the programmes are aimed at, and how this activity is formally recognised as part of the
workload model and in appraisal and promotion processes.
29
Very few members of staff currently participate in outreach activities – only three
members of staff (2 female, 1 male) regularly undertake this type of public engagement.
We therefore believe that this activity should be encouraged for all staff (Action 5.4),
and will ensure that not only is public engagement encouraged but it will be recognised
positively during staff appraisals. UCL has put together a list of “inspiring women in
science” speakers, and we will encourage IGH female staff to join that list.
Although staff are undertaking only a small amount of public engagement, there are
frequent requests from media to provide opinions and expert analyses. Table 13
summarises the department’s responses to media requests in the past year.
Table 13: Providing spokespeople for internal and external media opportunities
Type of media
UCL
external
media
Regular Newsletter
UCL
or Number of Number of men
women
9
8
BBC Interview Lancet external
Lecture
1
0
BBC Report
Autopsy
Mobile external
1
0
Guardian Report World external
City Blogger
1
0
“Spotlight on”
1
1
UCL
Table 17 shows a relatively gender-balanced set of opportunities for women and men
in the Department to interact with the media. However, we believe that these
opportunities could be enhanced for all staff through further training opportunities –
see Action 5.5.
Flexibility and managing career breaks
Provide data for the past three years (where possible with clearly labelled graphical
illustrations) on the following with commentary on their significance and how they have
affected action planning.
(i)
Maternity return rate – comment on whether maternity return rate in
the department has improved or deteriorated and any plans for further
improvement. If the department is unable to provide a maternity return rate,
please explain why.
Staff planning maternity leave meet with their line manager during their pregnancy for
planning. There is support available for staff to use ‘keep in touch days’ with the
30
department while they are on maternity leave to make the transition back to work
easier. Through this scheme up to 10 days can be used, with time off in lieu at a later
date, for staff to attend meetings and keep abreast of major developments. We
believe this helps to keep the return rate high for those who wish to return. Indeed
four staff members have taken maternity leave in the past three years, all of whom
have returned to work. For further support, we will include human resources in formal
meetings to support staff to plan their return (Action 4.9).
Data generated from the IGH staff survey results reveal that while 50% (2/4) of
respondents that had taken maternity leave reported that they felt “guilty” for
becoming pregnant or taking leave, 100% of the same respondents (4/4) were satisfied
with the maternity leave arrangements provided at IGH and reported that they
continued to fulfil work responsibilities/check e-mails during their leave. From the IGH
staff survey, one member of staff noted that more could be done to provide actual
cover for their work while on maternity leave. She identified the need to ‘provide
maternity cover - i.e. actually post someone in my role not get others with their own
jobs to cover bits and pieces’. At present the provision of work cover has been largely
contingent upon specific project requirements, deliverables and budget as well as the
discretion of the employee and their line manager. We recognise that such ad hoc
arrangements may not always be appropriate, and we will review the current
approach in order to propose more formalised arrangements for maternity cover in
the future (Action 4.13).
UCL maternity leave policies already go beyond the statutory requirements and are
available to all staff with no minimum employment period. In addition UCL has
support packages for staff returning from maternity leave, such as the ability to have a
paid sabbatical from teaching responsibilities for one term to enable them to get back
up to speed with their research. One member of staff returning from maternity leave
in the last year (2013/14) has taken the paid teaching sabbatical and reported
positively that it, in combination with the Institute’s generally supportive approach to
flexible working, helped relieve some of the pressure associated with returning to
work.
However, during the preparation of this application, we noted that the return to work
date for new mothers at IGH (at four months post-birth on average) is 2 months earlier
than the WHO-recommended time for continuation of exclusive breast-feeding (WHO
recommends that, as far as possible, babies are exclusively breastfed for 6 months). In
order to enable new mothers to comply with the WHO recommendations on breastfeeding, IGH has decided to adopt a policy to enable all women to work from home
from 4-6 months after the birth of their child. Thus, women will be able to return to
work (full-time if they wish), but will be able to do this from home.
Paternity, adoption and parental leave uptake – comment on the uptake of paternity
leave by grade and parental and adoption leave by gender and grade. Has this
improved or deteriorated and what plans are there to improve further.
IGH actively supports academic staff while they are developing their careers and
families as reflected by the comments of those taking paternity and maternity leave. ‘I
31
was easily able to understand my paternity entitlements from the information
available on the UCL website and was supported by my line manager to manage my
work flow during my leave’ said one academic member of staff (SWAN grade 4).
Since April 2013, UCL increased its paternity leave allowance from 2 weeks to 4 weeks
full pay. Three academic staff members have taken paternity leave since October 2010
with one member having taken leave twice.
There is no record of adoption leave uptake at IGH since 2010.
(ii)
Numbers of applications and success rates for flexible working by
gender and grade – comment on any disparities. Where the number of women
in the department is small applicants may wish to comment on specific
examples.
We do not have data on the applications and success rates for flexible working – the
majority of flexible working arrangements are organised informally between the
individual and their line manager. However, from a recent staff survey we found that
six academic staff members (two male and four female) had requested a change in
their contracted work arrangements in terms of flexibility (e.g. number of hours,
variation of core hours, or days, location of workplace etc.), for longer than one
month. The requests came from staff at a range of grades, and were to their individual
line managers. All of these requests were granted.
In addition to this research staff often have informal arrangements for working from
home and data from the staff survey show that overall staff are highly satisfied with
the flexibility of their working hours.
Since the approval of such requests is ultimately at the discretion of the line manager
this may introduce some inequality if some line managers are more willing to consider
flexible working than others. We therefore plan to ensure that line managers are
aware of the UCL policy on flexible working (Action 4.10) and to start to collect and
monitor this data (Action 4.11).
a)
For each of the areas below, explain what the key issues are in the department,
what steps have been taken to address any imbalances, what success/impact has been
achieved so far and what additional steps may be needed.
(i)
Flexible working – comment on the numbers of staff working flexibly
and their grades and gender, whether there is a formal or informal system, the
support and training provided for managers in promoting and managing
flexible working arrangements, and how the department raises awareness of
the options available.
As noted above data is not available regarding applications for flexible working and
indeed the numbers of staff who do work flexibly. There is however a culture of
flexibility with regard to work management within IGH reflected strongly in the
responses to the staff survey.
The staff survey highlighted how an informal system or culture of flexibility can
address the individual needs of staff but also on occasions miss opportunities. While
32
discussions related to flexible working between returning staff (e.g. after maternity
leave) and their line manager currently take place (also to include the Institute
manager when they are in post from November 2014) and working from home is
common and often adopted as a strategy to ease back into work after maternity leave,
implementing a routine pre-parental leave meeting with line managers will also be
explored (Action 4.13). The potential for peer support networks drawing on the
experience of academic colleagues with parental leave experience will also be
canvassed (Action 4.14).
(ii)
Cover for maternity and adoption leave and support on return –
explain what the department does, beyond the university maternity policy
package, to support female staff before they go on maternity leave,
arrangements for covering work during absence, and to help them achieve a
suitable work-life balance on their return.
IGH has a culture of flexibility with regard to employee management of their work
flow. This has been demonstrated through the IGH approach to employee maternity
leave and return to work. Options around flexible working are discussed with line
managers when employees return to work while the Institute has also demonstrated
flexibility when responding to individual circumstances which at times have involved
going above and beyond university maternity policy.
As noted previously, working from home is common practice within the Institute and
employees are largely empowered to develop a strategy with their line manager to
manage their specific work situation. This extends to discussions of cover to be
provided during maternity leave which despite not being part of the IGH strategy, is
nevertheless an option that could be taken in future depending on the nature of the
employee’s workflow, deadlines and project budgets and at the discretion of their line
manager.
b)
Any other comments: maximum 500 words
Please comment here on any other elements which are relevant to the application, e.g. other
SET-specific initiatives of special interest that have not been covered in the previous sections.
Include any other relevant data (e.g. results from staff surveys), provide a commentary on it
and indicate how it is planned to address any gender disparities identified.
This Athena SWAN application has given us, as a new department, an opportunity to
review not only the opportunities to improve our working environment to achieve
greater gender equity, but also an opportunity to identify gaps in our overall policies
and procedures to enable the department to function efficiently and equitably. The
SAT team has met frequently over the past 6 months and has maintained a close
relationship with the department’s Senior Management Team to review the findings of
our surveys (e.g. the IGH survey of staff satisfaction and gender equitable working
procedures). We believe that this has been beneficial to the whole department, and
have every confidence that the Action Plan will be implemented and is achievable.
Of note, our major findings are that the actual subject of our department (Global
Health) attracts an overwhelmingly female student body – and we have suggested that
33
the reasons for this should be explored and addressed as necessary. Global Health
should be of concern to everyone, not just women, and we believe that it is important
to understand and address the reasons why men are not attracted to our teaching
courses in equal numbers.
The survey of staff satisfaction indicated relatively high levels of support for the
current working environment in our department, but there was a worrying trend to
lower levels of satisfaction among female staff. Again, understanding and addressing
the reasons for this lower level of job satisfaction among women will be our highest
priority in the coming years.
Word count: 248
c)
Action plan
Provide an action plan as an appendix. An action plan template is available on the
Athena SWAN website.
The Action Plan should be a table or a spreadsheet comprising actions to address the
priorities identified by the analysis of relevant data presented in this application,
success/outcome measures, the post holder responsible for each action and a timeline
for completion. The plan should cover current initiatives and your aspirations for the
next three years.
The action plan does not need to cover all areas at Bronze; however the expectation
is that the department will have the organisational structure to move forward,
including collecting the necessary data.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44