Initial Equalities Impact Assessment Template
ES1.2
Department:
Completed by (lead):
Date of initial
assessment:
ENVIRONMENT AND SPORT
John Turner /Mark Anderson
2nd November 2011
Revision Dates:
9th February 2012
Area to be assessed: (i.e. name of policy,
Reduce Recycling Credits
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)
Analysis of recycling credits database
1. Describe the aims,
objectives or purpose of
the function/policy,
practice, procedure or
decision and who is
intended to benefit.
Recycling credits are a means to pass on to recyclers the savings in the
disposal and collection costs, which result from recycling household
waste.
The Council pays recycling credits to a small number of community
groups, business or other organisations who collect household waste for
recycling, thus reducing the amount of waste taken to landfill.
The Council currently pays credits to eight community groups or
organisations; Aire Valley Recycling, Keighley Furniture Project, CHAS
Housing Aid, Newlands Furniture Project, Good Neighbour/Parish,
Windhill Furniture Project, Save the Mothers and Clothes Aid. The
proposal is to cease payments to all but the largest recycling organisation
via this scheme, Aire Valley Recycling, who have the greatest impact
across the district – thereby minimising disadvantage. The reduction will
save the Council approx £70,000 per annum.
The Public Sector
Equality Duty requires
the Council to have
“due regard” to the
need to:-
2. What is the level of
impact on each group/
protected characteristics in
terms of the three aims of
the duty?
(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)
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?
Some of the eight
community groups or
organisations employ
people with disabilities that
may be impacted if the
projects are unable to
attract sustainable
alternative funding
Increasing the
charges or fees
for recycled
products may
offset the loss of
the grant
funding, however
this would need
to be addressed
by the individual
associations or
groups.
Please indicate high (H)
medium (M), low (L), no
effect (N) for each.
N
Disability
L
Gender
reassignment
N
Protected characteristics
Age
Race
N
Religion/Belief
N
Pregnancy and
maternity
Sexual Orientation
N
N
Sex
N
Any other area
L
Some of the eight
community groups or
organisations are engaged
in recycling goods across
economically/socially
disadvantaged
communities
5. Has there been any consultation/engagement with the
appropriate protected characteristics?
YES
Increasing the
charges or fees
for recycled
products may
offset the loss of
the grant
funding, however
this would need
to be addressed
by the individual
associations or
groups.
NO X
6. What action(s) will you take to reduce any disproportionately negative impact, if any?
There is little the Service can do to mitigate for the loss of service, other than removing recyclates as bulk
waste, however, this would not have any impact on the issues identified above.
7. Based on the information in sections 2 to 6, should this
YES
function/policy/procedure/practice or a decision proceed to
NO X
Detailed Impact Assessment? (recommended if one or more H
under section 2)
Assessor signature:
Approved by: MA
Date approved:
3rd November 2011