Big Lottery Fund
Second joint equality scheme annual progress report
December 2007 – November 2008
Second Joint Equality Scheme Annual Progress Report
December 2007-November 2008
Further copies available from:
Phone: 0845 4 10 20 30
Textphone: 0845 6 02 16 59
Email: [email protected]
Our website: www.biglotteryfund.org.uk
Photography: Alan Fletcher, Brian Morrison
Accessibility
Please contact us to discuss any specific communication needs
you may have.
Our equality principles
Promoting accessibility; valuing cultural diversity; promoting
participation; promoting equality of opportunity; promoting
inclusive communities; reducing disadvantage and exclusion.
Please visit our website for more information.
We care about the environment
The Big Lottery Fund seeks to minimise its negative
environmental impact and only uses proper sustainable resources.
Our mission
We are committed to bringing real improvements to communities
and the lives of people most in need.
Our values
We have identified seven values that underpin our work: fairness;
accessibility; strategic focus; involving people; innovation;
enabling; additional to government.
The Big Lottery Fund is committed to valuing diversity and
promoting equality of opportunity, both as a grantmaker and
employer. The Big Lottery Fund will aim to adopt an inclusive
approach to ensure grant applicants and recipients, stakeholders,
job applicants and employees are treated fairly.
Big Lottery Fund is the joint operating name of the New
Opportunities Fund and the National Lottery Charities Board
(which made grants under the name of Community Fund).
© Big Lottery Fund, April 2009
2
Foreword
When I became Chief Executive of the Big Lottery Fund just over a year ago, I made
a personal commitment to drive our equality agenda forward.
I am pleased that we have continued to make strong progress in addressing the
various commitments outlined in our action plan. Among our key achievements
is the start of our Dignity at Work campaign and joint senior management/union
commitment to tackle bullying in the workplace. In addition our staff continue to
provide creative responses to a range of accessibility queries from our customers,
and I am reassured that no complaints of race or disability discrimination have been
upheld against us. However we need to be sure we maintain this record and do not
become complacent.
One of our key challenges has been to check that we are asking applicants and
grant-holders the right questions about how they deal with equality but in a way
that is proportionate both to the size of the organisation and the funding that is
being requested. We also need to identify what impact our funding is making and
who is benefiting from it. We will continue to explore these questions further as we
start developing our new online IT system and processes.
I recognise that disabled people continue to be under-represented in our workforce.
This is an issue, which we will address actively in future external recruitment
campaigns.
We will shortly publish our revised Joint Equality Scheme, which will include a gender
dimension for the first time. In doing so, I will ensure that the necessary resources, in
terms of people, time and money are available to make our scheme a reality.
I hope you find our second annual report an interesting read and a reflection of the
commitment among our staff, Board and committees to promoting equality across
all aspects of our business.
Peter Wanless
Chief Executive
3
Contents
SECTION 1: Introduction SECTION 2: Our Joint Equality Scheme
5
6
SECTION 3: Format of Annual Report
7
SECTION 4: Information Gathering
8
SECTION 5: Action Plan 24
SECTION 6: Equality Assurance
35
Appendices
1: Equality principles
50
2: Equality assurance process flowchart and equality prompts
51
3: Contact details
53
4
Section 1
Introduction
About the Big Lottery Fund
The Big Lottery Fund (BIG) came into being as a new
UK-wide Lottery distributor on 1 June 2004 through
an administrative merger of the New Opportunities
Fund and the Community Fund. BIG was formally
established in law following the passage of the National
Lottery Act 2006 on 1 December 2006 when it
assumed the responsibilities of the dissolved National
Lottery Charities Board (Community Fund) the New
Opportunities Fund, and the Millennium Commission.
BIG aims to bring real improvements to communities
and the lives of people most in need. To achieve this,
we have identified seven values that underpin all
of our work: fairness, accessibility, strategic focus,
involving people, innovation, enabling and additional to
government. More details of our mission and values are
on our website at www.biglotteryfund.org.uk
BIG is responsible for giving out half of the money for
good causes raised by the National Lottery. Our funding
covers health, education, environment and charitable
purposes.
BIG has a UK-wide Board, which is supported by
four country committees and a number of corporate
committees, including resources and audit and risk.
The BIG senior management team is headed by
the Chief Executive, together with seven directors
responsible for:
●● Policy and Partnerships
●● Communications and Marketing
●● Finance and Corporate Services
●● Operations
●● Northern Ireland Directorate
●● Scotland Directorate
●● Wales Directorate
In turn the senior management team is supported by
the Business Delivery Group made up of senior staff
from across the organisation and a number of corporate
project teams delivering specific tasks.
Our funding programmes
Our current programmes across the UK aim to support
three broad themes agreed with the UK Government
and devolved administrations:
●● supporting community learning and creating
opportunity
●● promoting community safety and cohesion
●● promoting well-being.
Our aim is to fund projects and organisations that
make a difference. Instead of focusing on what an
organisation is or does, we focus particularly on what
the organisation aims to achieve with our funding, in
other words, the outcomes of our funding.
Therefore, in each UK country, we have developed three
or four national outcomes to support our strategic
themes. These set out more explicitly what we hope
our funding will achieve. They are the result of separate
consultations carried out in each UK country during
2004-2005. We aim to achieve these outcomes by
funding through a set of funding programmes in each
country. These programmes divide into two broad
areas: demand-led and strategic.
Demand-led programmes encourage organisations and
groups to bring their own ideas and local solutions to
us for funding. Strategic programmes focus more on a
specific outcome or outcomes we want our funding to
achieve, although we will still encourage local solutions
to local needs.
As well as our national programmes in England, Scotland,
Wales and Northern Ireland, we operate a small number
of grants programmes right across the UK.
Details of all of our current funding programmes can be
found on our website at www.biglotteryfund.org.uk
On 17 November 2008, BIG launched BIG thinking,
a public consultation on our strategic framework for
2009 onwards. The consultation closed on 27 February
2009 and we are currently analysing the responses
received, with a view to feeding them into our strategic
framework and separate country plans for the period
2009 -15. We expect to publish the new strategic
framework in the Summer 2009.
5
Section 2
Our Joint Equality Scheme
Production of Joint Equality Scheme
Under the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 (DDA),
BIG is required to produce an equality scheme. There
is no similar requirement under the Race Relations
Amendment Act (RRAA), however our Board took the
decision to produce a joint scheme as we felt it would
allow us to meet the general duty to promote race
equality more effectively. BIG therefore published its
Joint Equality Scheme on 5 December 2006 and in so
doing we sought to adopt the highest standards from
both duties.
Content of Joint Equality Scheme
In line with legal requirements our Scheme sets out
the following:
●● details of relevant functions and policies.
●● how disabled people and people from black and
minority ethnic communities have been involved in
producing the scheme.
●● an action plan.
Arrangements for:
XXGathering information about BIG’s performance on
race and disability equality.
XXAssessing and consulting on the likely impact of
relevant policies and functions on the promotion of
disability and race equality and improving these
were necessary.
XXMonitoring BIG’s policies and functions to ensure
there is no adverse impact on the promotion of
disability and race equality.
XXPublishing the results of such assessments and
consultation.
XXEnsuring public access to information and services,
which BIG provides.
XXTraining BIG staff in the race and disability duties.
XXReporting annually on progress and in particular
demonstrating that action has been taken in the
scheme and the appropriate outcomes have been
achieved.
6
XXReviewing and revising the scheme including a
review of the list of relevant policies and functions
every three years.
Reporting arrangements
Under the RRAA we are required to produce an
annual progress report, which highlights our ethnic
employment monitoring results. Under the DDA we are
required to provide an overview of progress against the
disability action points within our scheme’s action plan,
the results of our information gathering and how we
have used this information.
In line with our commitment to adopt the highest
standards from both duties our annual progress
report will also include the results from our disability
employment monitoring and an overview of progress
against the ethnicity action points within our scheme’s
action plan, the results of our information gathering and
how we have used this information. It will also include
a report on the results or our equality assurance work
during the last 12-months (a requirement within race
relations legislation which BIG is not obliged to comply
with).
Review
Under the Gender Equality Duty (GED) BIG is not
required to produce an equality scheme. In line with our
approach to the RRAA, we decided that it also made
sense to integrate a gender dimension into our existing
scheme. Subsequently, during 2008, we undertook a
consultation on our draft gender equality objectives
and associated tasks and we will shortly be publishing
our revised Joint (race, disability and gender) Equality
Scheme.
Under the DDA, we are required to review our Equality
Scheme after three years. We would like our revised
Scheme to run in tandem with our financial year; 1
April – 31 March. We therefore propose to launch our
revised Scheme by May 2010. This revised scheme will
run for another three years.
Section 3
Feedback
We welcome feedback both positive and negative.
If employees wish to complain about BIG failing to meet
its duties under either the DDA or RRAA, they can do so
by raising the matter with their line manager or Human
Resources (for employment matters) or the Corporate
Equality manager (for external issues).
Members of the public may make complaints by
contacting our
Customer care and quality adviser at:
Big Lottery Fund
1 Plough Place
London
EC4A 1DE
Format of annual report
This report sets out the progress made during the
period December 2007 - November 2008 against the
commitments set out in our joint equality scheme and
covers the following areas:
XXInformation gathered (including employment
monitoring results) – overview of systems, key
findings and actions arising – see Section four
XXAction plan (internal and external action points) –
see Section five
XXCompleted equality assurance work highlighting
(race and disability) results and actions arising –
see Section six.
Fax: 0207211 1753
Textphone: 020 7211 3700
[email protected]
7
Section 4
Information gathering
During the past 12 months we have collated and analysed information from a number of sources, which has
allowed us to assess our current performance on promoting race and disability equality and build the findings into
our equality assurance work (see Section 6).
This section of the report outlines the results from our information gathering and any actions planned, broken
down by disability and ethnicity where possible.
Internal information
1. Employment monitoring results (1 April 2007 – 31 March 2008)
a) Staff in post (on 31 March 2008)
Ethnicity by grade
Chart A
BME
White/UK
Unknown
Grade 3 and below
Num
102
527
12
641
%
Grade 4 and above
Num
16
44
82
273
2
4
321
%
14
85
1
Chart A shows that we have a good mix of BME staff at grades 3 and below and at grade 4 (management level)
and above, with a small majority in the lower graded posts.
8
Section 4
Ethnicity comparison with UK workforce
Chart B
BIG
Ethnicity
Total
White/UK
BME
Unknown
Amount
962
800
146
16
UK
%
83
15
2
Amount
29471000
26523900
2947100
%
Expected
Totals
%
90
10
0
84
16
0
Chart B shows that 15 per cent our staff are of a BME background as opposed to 16 per cent of the population in
the areas in which we are based.
9
Section 4
Disability status of BIG workforce compared with UK workforce
Chart C
BIG
Amount
934
28
UK
%
Amount
97
3
%
80
20
Chart C suggests that we continue to have an under-representation of disabled staff, at 3 per cent, as opposed
to the proportion of disabled people in the population of working age at 20 per cent. As part of our engagement
with the Employers’ Forum on Disability we have had our practices, as an employer and a service provider, audited
and have received a diagnostic report, which highlights areas requiring attention. We have considered the findings
(including those relating to efforts to increase application rates) and have agreed a set of priority actions, which we
are currently implementing. For example, a targeted advertisement has been placed in REMPLOY, and BIG will now
use a welcome statement for future job vacancies.
b)
Applicants for employment (internal and external recruitment)
In the period 1 April 2007 to 31 March 2008, there were 162 positions advertised internally/externally. For these
162 posts, there were 2,156 applicants. In the period 1 April 2007 to 31 March 2008, there were 239 new
starters.
10
Section 4
Applicants by ethnicity
Chart D
Out of the 2,156 applicants there were:
White/UK
BME
Unknown
Total
1439
340
377
2156
67%
16%
17%
New starters by ethnicity
Chart E
11
Section 4
Ethnicity of new starters in comparison with Expected Totals
Chart F
Out of 239 new starters there were:
White/UK
173
BME
50
Unknown
16
Charts D, E and F show that 16 per cent of applicants came from a BME background and that 29 per cent of new
starters came from a BME background.
We note the high number of applicants where ethnicity is unknown (17 per cent) which makes it difficult to draw
conclusions from these figures. Our new online system will improve the future response rate as completion of
ethnic background is now mandatory.
In 7 per cent of cases the ethnic background of new starters was unknown, this is an improvement on the previous
year where 13 per cent were previously unknown.
12
Section 4
Applicants by disability status
Out of 2,156 applicants, 54 considered themselves to be disabled. Out of 239 New Starters, 4 considered
themselves to be disabled.
Chart G
Disabled
Applicants
New
starters
UK
Population
54
4
Non
Disabled
1406
235
Unknown
696
0
Total
2156
239
% Non
% Disabled
Disabled
65%
3%
98%
2%
80%
%
Unknown
32%
0%
20%
0%
Chart G shows the continued small number of applicants and disabled new starters compared to the proportion of
the UK population. The proportion of disabled applicants has more than doubled from 0.9 per cent in the previous
year to 2.5 per cent, while the proportion of new starters with a disability has fallen slightly from 1.9 per cent to
1.7 per cent
Again we note the high number of applicants where disability status is unknown (32 per cent) which makes it
difficult to draw conclusions from these figures. Our new online system will improve the future response rate.
13
Section 4
c) Staff who apply for and receive training
Management development programme
There were 24 delegates who took part in BIG’s management development programme, one of whom was
disabled.
Ethnic background
Chart H
BME
White/UK
Unknown
Participants
8%
92%
Working for BIG
15%
83%
2%
Chart H indicates that the percentage of BME staff participating in the programme was under-representative,
although as we are dealing with very small numbers (24 in total) this is not considered to be statistically significant.
14
Section 4
Corporate Sponsorship
There were 10 delegates who received corporate sponsorship. None of the delegates was disabled and the White/
UK: BME split was representative of the staff population.
All other development activities
1,817 delegates participated in all other development activities of which 73 considered themselves to be disabled.
Ethnic Background
Chart I
BME
White/UK
Unknown
Participants
9%
91%
Working for BIG
15%
83%
2%
Chart I indicates that the percentage of BME staff participating in other development activities was also underrepresentative. This will be kept under review to determine whether action is necessary.
15
Section 4
d) Staff who benefit or suffer detriment as a result of performance assessment procedures
Bonus nominations
Ethnic background
Ethnic background
Black
Asian
Chinese
Mixed
Other
White Other
Total BME
White UK
Unknown
Total
Total
Nominated
10
10
2
2
3
17
44
303
1
348
Eligible Staff
%
at 31.3.08
Nominated
30
33
50
20
3
67
8
25
3
100
52
33
146
30
794
38
16
6
956
36
Chart J
It has not been possible to discern trends in a numbers of areas of ethnicity as numbers of staff are so low.
However BME staff are less likely to be nominated for a bonus than White UK staff. This is not a repeat of last
year’s figure where the difference between the two categories was minimal.
Last year we noted that Asian staff were under-represented in bonus payments and that we would keep this figure
under review. The same trend has appeared this year (although it was not statistically significant). This may be
partly explained by the fact that Asian staff occupy a higher proportion of roles at grade 1 and 2 levels and bonus
nomination results tended to be weighted more towards staff in higher graded posts. We now have a facility to
measure EPM ratings effectively and it is recommended that we analyse ratings of Asian staff over the coming
year to identify any trends that will enable us to shed light on the poor performance of this group in being awarded
bonus payments. We will also keep under review the spread of nominations across grades.
Disability
Disability
Status
Non Disabled
Disabled
Total
Total
Eligible Staff
%
Nominated
at 31.3.08
Nominated
339
927
37
9
348
29
956
31
36
Chart K shows that non-disabled staff are more likely to receive a bonus payment than disabled staff. This is a
reverse of last year’s figure.
16
Section 4
e) Staff who were the subject of formal disciplinary procedures
From 31 March 2006 to 3 December 2008 (two year period) there were 28 disciplinary cases, none of which
involved disabled staff.
25 per cent of cases involved BME staff. Due to the small numbers of staff involved this was not considered to be
statistically significant, however we will continue to keep this issue under review.
f) Staff who are leaving BIG
During the 12 Month period 2007/2008 there were 210 leavers. This equates to a 21.4 per cent turnover.
Ethnicity
Chart L
Leavers %
Staff
Composition %
Asian
Black
Chinese
5.7
5.2
6.2
3.0
0.1
0.3
Mixed Other White
other
4.8
0.5
9.5
0.8
0.3
7.0
TOTAL WHITE UNKNOWN
BME
UK
27.6
67.2
5.2
16.7
81.1
2.2
Chart L shows that the ethnicity of leavers was weighted towards BME staff. However, this was because of the
continuing turnover and redundancies in our London office (through organisational relocation and restructuring)
and higher turnover levels in London and Birmingham more generally. The higher proportion of BME employees
progressing through the recruitment process offsets this.
17
Section 4
Disability
Leavers
Current Workforce
Disabled %
1.9
3
Non-Disabled %
98.1
97
Chart M
Chart M shows that the proportion of disabled staff that leave is less that their representation in the workforce.
This is an improvement on figures for last year, which showed a 4.8 per cent leaving rate.
Conclusions:
The under-representation of disabled staff within BIG’s workforce continues to be an area requiring particular
attention.
2. Employee survey
At the start of 2008, BIG reviewed the employee survey results from 2006 and 2007 and noted that while
last year’s results on bullying and harassment at work were largely positive and showed an improvement on the
previous one, there was still room for improvement.
Subsequently we commissioned independent survey consultants Edgecumbe to invite all staff who indicated (in the
2007 survey) that they had experienced bullying and harassment to participate in confidential interviews. Based
on feedback from those who responded (respecting their anonymity), a confidential report was presented to BIG’s
Senior Management Team. Following that report it was agreed that we should do the following:
ensure everyone is fully aware of Dignity at Work issues across all levels of our organisation. With support from
our Board chair and members and working in partnership with the Joint Union Group (JUG), we will embed
Dignity at Work throughout our organisational culture.
reinforce a climate where ‘zero tolerance’ of bullying and harassment and all forms of unacceptable behaviour in
the workplace is communicated and upheld (in line with our commitment to promoting valuing and respecting
others)
ensure managers have a sound understanding of Dignity at Work, including HR policies and procedures
clarify, validate and reinforce the procedure for staff expressing concerns. Work expediently to resolve all cases
of bullying, harassment and unacceptable behaviour.
Subsequently a series of training initiatives, starting at the top, have been rolled out during 2008, to all levels in
the organisation to ensure that everyone understands their roles and responsibilities in this area. In addition we
have developed a Dignity at Work Week leading up to National Ban Bullying at Work Day on 7 November which
was supported by a set of Dignity at Work principles jointly agreed by management and the two unions in BIG
(Prospect and Unite).
At the end of 2007, BIG decided to participate in the Sunday Times Best Companies Survey rather than continuing
with its own employee survey. The Best Companies survey uses confidential feedback from employees to find out
how good their employers really are and in early 2008 BIG was awarded a ‘one to watch’ rating. This score means
that our results were encouraging and if built upon we should be able to enter the ‘Top one hundred businesses
ranking’ in the future.
18
Section 4
BIG participated in the Best Companies Survey again in September 2008 and the results are pending. As the Best
Companies Survey does not collect data on the respondent’s ethnicity or disability status it will not be possible to
analyse responses in this manner. BIG is however committed to considering an in-house survey every few years,
which would allow us to pick up these issues.
3. Equal Pay Audit
BIG commissioned the Hay group to conduct an Equal Pay Audit in 2008, which considered pay issues in relation to
staff gender and ethnicity. Hay reported that overall there appeared to be no clear pattern of paying any one ethnic
group more that the other on average, although the small population size for many of the ethnic groups made it
difficult to draw any clear conclusions on this.
On the basis of the study carried out, BIG has concluded that there were no material differences to the pay of staff
from different ethnic backgrounds requiring BIG to take Equal Pay action.
External Information
1. Funding statistics
Generic equality monitoring has been introduced into the majority of our new programmes. Our second year
monitoring results for ethnicity and disability are presented below. These monitoring results relate to awards
(excluding Awards for All, Living Landmarks, Wellbeing, transfer grants and stage two development grants) made
during the period 1 April 2007 – 31 March 2008. They account for 11,950 applications and 2,666 awards made
totaling £915 million.
These results come with a health warning. We are aware of multiple counting and a level of non-response, which
has skewed the results. We also must acknowledge the likelihood of question misinterpretation.
Number of
Number of
Amount of funding Requested amount
applications
awards
(£000)
(£000)
Ethnicity (applicants are asked if their project is directed at or of particular relevance, to people from a specific
ethnic background. They can select up to three categories therefore these responses incorporate double and
triple counting).
White UK
2,929
25%
598
20%
£110,653 12%
£766,806
White other
422
4%
54
13%
£6,638 <1%
£129,074
Asian
613
5%
101
17%
£32,553
4%
£213,738
Black
640
5%
83
13%
£26,435
3%
£205,372
Chinese and
410
3%
53
13%
£13,925
2%
£165,112
other
Mixed
366
3%
67
18%
£14,875
2%
£155,531
Not specifically
7,172
60%
1,625
23%
£576,646 63%
£2,446,528
targeted
Disability (applicants are asked if their project is of particular relevance to disabled people).
Disabled
2,107
18%
560
28%
£172,163 19%
£610,379
Not disabled
9,845
82%
2,107
21%
£742,653 81%
£3,625,838
19
Section 4
We are currently in the process of reviewing how we classify, collate, analyse and report on beneficiary equality
monitoring data. As part of this work we carried out a focused piece of quantitative and qualitative research in
March 2008 to identify how we could improve the reliability of the data we capture. The recommendations from
the research are being considered in the design of our future funding processes and IT system (2009+). In 200809 we will also be introducing some further changes to improve the quality of the data we currently capture.
The statistics highlighted on the previous page can provide a useful overview of application and success rates
however case studies are better at illustrating the types of work we support through our funding:
Disability Case Study: Well Being England Programme
The Big Lottery Fund has awarded a grant amounting to over £16m to the charity Mind for its ‘Moving People’
portfolio, comprising 34 nationwide and local projects. The aim is to improve public understanding of mental
health disorders and stamp out the stigma and discrimination associated with them. A large-scale marketing/
advertising campaign is planned to reach 75 per cent of the adult population in England. This will be backed
up by activities such as the ‘Get Moving!’ project, a national campaign to promote mass participation events
focusing on mental and physical well-being to build up to the 2012 Olympic Games. Other projects with national
coverage deal with raising awareness of mental health issues for medical students and trainee teachers, and give
legal advice to individuals and organisations. At a local level Moving People will improve mental and physical wellbeing through a range of physical exercise programmes.
BME Case Study: Reaching Communities England Programme
The Big Lottery Fund has awarded a grant of £489,864 to Highways to Opportunities, to support a learning and
work project based in Oldham. The project will provide a women-only service in the form of a double-decker bus
supported by two outreach centres and a town centre base and seeks to help Asian women with little English
speaking/writing ability to access vocational information, advice, guidance, ICT tasters and job-search activities.
The aim of the project is to enable Asian women in deprived areas of Oldham to compete more effectively in the
job market and find and retain jobs or take up training opportunities. Original funding for the bus expired in March
2006. Further funding was obtained from the Home Office and the bus launched again in May 2006. Our grant
will continue and expand the service.
2. Research into public attitudes to BIG
In November 2007 the British Market Research Bureau (BMRB) was commissioned to carry out research designed
to measure the general public’s awareness of BIG, and their attitude towards BIG and Lottery funding in general
and, to track the general public’s awareness of The People’s £50 Million Lottery contest.
Awareness of BIG was measured using prompted and unprompted questions. As in November 2006, awareness
was slightly higher among those with disabilities at 39 per cent, compared to 35 per cent among those with no
disability. During the final survey respondents who had heard of the People’s £50 Million Lottery Contest were
asked whether they agreed that it had made them more aware of Lottery funding for good causes. Those with a
disability were more likely to agree strongly than those without (26 per cent of those with a disability compared
with 14 per cent without). There were no discernable differences between ethnic groups.
20
Section 4
In 2008, BIG commissioned a further, focused, omnibus survey to assess public awareness of BIG. This particular
survey did not seek information on the respondent’s disability status however it was possible to identify that the
awareness levels between White/UK and BME members of the public were identical at 31 per cent.
3. Accessibility requests (publications/events)
Rather than stating that all of our materials are available in alternative formats and languages, BIG makes a
commitment to consider and respond to accessibility queries on a case-by-case basis. We aim to make the most
practical and cost effective response to each query taking into consideration the enquirer’s preferred solution.
Requests for publications in alternative formats and languages were low (seven) and much lower than the previous
year (28 in total). Requests for materials in alternative formats consisted of four Braille, two large-print and one
audio-tape. We also used the language line service once to communicate with a Polish speaker.
We were also contacted by a small number of individuals who expressed difficulties using some of our PDF and
RTF forms because their screen reader software could not read the protected question or explanation text. In most
cases the best solution was to reproduce the forms in plain Word format. We have noted this issue and will ensure
that screen reader/writer considerations are built into the development of our new online system as far as possible.
In addition, we provided a number of solutions to specific access requests, for example; held face-to-face meetings
to talk through the content of our application materials, adapted email communication with an applicant so that the
text used was in a larger font size, produced large print versions of handouts at an information event and drafted
letters to make them more accessible for a screen reader user.
4. Freedom of Information requests and Complaints
In the last 12 months, BIG received six race and four disability related freedom of information requests (out of a
total of 135). Most of the requests related to information regarding specific applications and all were granted, bar
one which was withdrawn and another because the information was already in the public domain.
In the same period we handled seven race/disability related complaints (meaning they were either received and/or
closed during this period). Five of the complaints related to disability issues, two of which were addressed through
feedback, whilst one went to stage one and another reached stage two. All five were not upheld. We dealt with
two race-related complaints, one was not upheld at stage one and the other went to the Independent Complaint
Reviewer and again was also not upheld. We are satisfied that there have been no cases of race or disability
discrimination, which have been upheld against us in the last 12- months.
Over the same period we received 848 complaints in total. 738 were addressed through feedback, 98 reached
stage one, 10 reached stage two and a further two went to the Independent Complaints Reviewer. The vast
majority of complaints we receive come from unsuccessful applicants and when we consider that the Big Lottery
Fund assesses approximately 37,740 applications per year we believe this to be a very small complaint ratio.
5. Customer satisfaction survey
From December 2007 to February 2008 we piloted an online customer satisfaction survey the results of which
have subsequently informed our customer service action plan. Our next survey, which we actively marketed, ran
from 1 September 2008 to 31 October 2008 and the results are currently being analysed.
21
Section 4
6. Public opinion on Lottery spend
In 2008, BIG commissioned ‘Opinion Leader’ to carry out research to gauge public priorities for Lottery fundingspend. The workshops involved a representative sample of the general public (including representation from
disabled people and people from BME backgrounds). In addition 20 in-depth interviews took place with ‘seldom
heard’ people in their homes: severely disabled people; people for whom English is a second language; carers and
people experiencing multiple deprivation. The key findings were:
There was a general level of support for targeting people most in need (while achieving broad spread).
There was synergy between the public’s ‘key principles’ and BIG’s values.
Useful links were established between public opinion and BIG’s current assessment criteria, outcomes approach
to funding and plans to be an intelligent funder.
There was a recognition that we have a role to play beyond simply our funding.
Our unique selling point is that we can reach parts others cannot.
We recognised the strong emphasis on the need to support young people.
7. Young Foundations Mapping Britain’s Needs
During 2008, the Big Lottery Fund contributed £100,000 to the Young Foundation’s Mapping Britain’s Needs
research, which we hope will be pivotal in helping shape our thinking over the next period of funding and beyond.
Mapping Britain’s Needs is a major in-depth overview of unmet and emerging need. It aims to guide the work of
government, foundations and others. The research seeks to make better public use of evidence about need –
including exploring inaccessible and hidden areas of need. It will also look at emerging and future needs and the
main external drivers, forces and trends in changing needs.
The initial indicative findings have highlighted the following:
Psychological needs dominate
Personal life events trigger unmet need – with reference being made to changes, which gradually impede core
functions such as the onset of mental health issues
Individual traits magnify vulnerability to unmet need – including but not limited to traits such as ethnic
background and disability status
Changes in state services, the market, civil society and community norms all create need, and
Data on unmet need is hard to reach - it was noted that there was a particular dearth of accurate and reliable
information on disability in children and older people and needs associated with victimisation, abuse and bullying.
The final report will be available in September 2009 and its findings will be used to inform decisions about our
future-funding framework.
8. Older people – evaluation
In December 2006, BIG commissioned research to assess the impact of our funding programmes on older people,
to explore opportunities for older people in our current funding programmes and to identify areas of need where
we could potentially make an effective contribution for older people in the future. The report was published in
December 2007 and highlighted that BME groups and older people with a disability were among specific groups of
older people who were seen to have particular needs or to be under-represented in funding streams.
22
Section 4
The researchers also suggested that BIG or other funding bodies could potentially assist older people in a number
of key areas including two where particular reference was made to mental health issues:
Health and social care (with mental health, including preventive work aimed at reducing social isolation being a
critical area of concern)
Independent living (with the recognition that low-level support services designed to enable people to maintain
their social networks and remain in their homes longer also enhance the physical and mental well-being of older
people).
BIG acknowledged in the report that the findings from the research will be used to inform our decisions about
future priorities for funding.
Further information on the results from all of our evaluations and research can be found on our website at
www.biglotteryfund.org.uk
23
Section 5
Action plan
This section sets out the progress we have made against the various internal and external commitments contained
within our action plan, which runs over the period December 2006 – November 2009.
Internal
Task and responsibility
1.Take action to maintain accurate records
on the disability and ethnicity status of staff
to monitor employment procedures.
Human Resources
2. To continue monitoring numbers and
percentage of applicants at each stage
of external recruitment and selection by
ethnicity and disability to identify priorities.
Human Resources
3. To continue monitoring numbers and
percentage of applicants at each stage
of internal recruitment and selection by
ethnicity and disability to identify priorities
for action.
Human Resources
4. To continue monitoring the numbers and
percentage of staff in post by grade and
directorate by ethnicity and disability to
identify priorities for action.
Human Resources
5. To continue monitoring the numbers and
percentage of staff making a bullying and
harassment or grievance complaint or who
are the subject of a disciplinary, by ethnicity
and disability to identify priorities for action.
Human Resources
6. To continue monitoring the numbers
and percentage of staff who have received
performance related bonuses by ethnicity
and disability to identify priorities for action.
Human Resources
24
Progress
We upgraded our HR system in December 2006 to enable staff
to update their personal files electronically. This was supported by
training, which highlighted the need to update personal disability
and ethnicity status details. Information on ethnicity subsequently
increased from 88 to 93% in 2006 and then to 97% in 2007.
Our new online application form was launched on 1 April 2008
and will make completion of personal monitoring information
mandatory (with the exception of sexual orientation). This should
further improve our records.
Employment monitoring results were collated and analysed for
the period 1 April 2007 – 31 March 2008. On this occasion, data
concerning our internal and external recruitment campaign was
combined (in the future, this data will be kept separate). Results
have been highlighted in Section 4.
As above.
Employment monitoring results were collated and analysed for
the period 1 April 2007 – 31 March 2008. Results have been
highlighted in Section 4.
As above.
As above.
Section 5
Task and responsibility
7. To continue monitoring the numbers
and percentage of leavers and reasons for
leaving by ethnicity and disability to identify
priorities for action.
Human Resources
8. To develop and implement a more
comprehensive way of monitoring training
application and nomination rates by ethnicity
and disability.
Human Resources
9. To monitor the ethnicity and disability
status of the appraisee in relation to all
decisions taken on performance and pay.
Human Resources
10. To take forward action to increase
the number and percentage of disabled
applicants in future external recruitment
and selection campaigns (particularly
directorates, where statistics suggest we
have no or few disabled staff).
Human Resources
11. To take action to improve the
appointment rate of black and minority
ethnic (BME) staff during internal
recruitment and selection campaigns.
Human Resources
Progress
As above.
Results have been highlighted in Section 4.
Our new HR system will allow us to monitor course participants by
ethnicity and disability more comprehensively in the future.
Our new online EPM (employee performance management)
system introduced in April 2008 will enable us to carry out a
comprehensive analysis in the future.
BIG participated in the Employer’s Forum on Disability’s Standard
to identify areas where we could improve our disability equality
performance. Our overall benchmark score was 58%, which was
higher than the overall average score for all participants of the
Disability Standard 2007 at 57%. However we scored below the
Public sector average at 60%. We have considered the findings
(including those relating to efforts to increase application rates)
and have agreed a set of priority actions, which we are currently
implementing. For example, a targeted advertisement was placed
in REMPLOY and a welcome statement will now be used for all job
vacancies.
We decided to review our employment monitoring results for
the period 1 April 2007 – 31 March 2008 before determining
whether further action was needed. As data concerning internal
and external recruitment campaign was combined it was not
possible to determine the appointment rate for internal campaigns.
In future years the data will be separated.
25
Section 5
Task and responsibility
12. To address the under representation of
BME staff receiving bonus awards
Human Resources
13. To take action to improve the retention
rates of disabled staff.
Human Resources
14. To ensure that the line managers
of disabled staff (with support from
HR) identify and address personal and
professional development, as part of the
Employee Performance Management
process.
Human Resources
26
Progress
The employment performance management (EPM) results were
collated and analysed for the period 1 April 2007 – 31 March
2008. Results indicated that it was not possible to discern trends
in a numbers of areas of ethnicity as the numbers of staff involved
were so low. However, we did identify that BME staff (as a group)
were less likely to be nominated for a bonus than White UK staff.
This is not a repeat of last year’s figure where the difference
between the two categories was minimal.
Last year we noted that Asian staff were under-represented
in bonus payments and that we would keep this figure under
review. The same trend has appeared this year. This may be partly
explained by the fact that Asian staff occupy a higher proportion
of roles at grade 1 and 2 levels (with bonus nominations being
weighted towards staff in higher graded posts). We now have a
facility to measure Employee Performance Management (EPM)
ratings effectively and we will therefore analyse the ratings of
Asian staff over the coming year to identify any trends that can
shed light on the lower success rate of this group.
The proportion of disabled staff that left BIG last year, was less
than the previous year, and less that the overall proportion of
disabled staff in BIG’s workforce.
BIG is currently developing a managing disabled staff-training
module for managers, which will be rolled out in December 2009
as part of a wider equality and diversity package.
Action as above.
Section 5
Task and responsibility
15. To explore the reasons for lower scoring
by BME staff on questions in BIG’s first
Employee Survey on corporate leadership.
Human Resources
16. To review the recommendations
from the evaluation of BIG’s pilot equality
assurance process and implement as
appropriate.
Policy and Partnerships
17.To conduct 1) equality assurance on all
new and reviewed HR policies and functions;
2) annual monitoring to assess the need
for a full equality impact assessment (as
per equality assurance timetable); and 3)
subsequent equality impact assessments.
Human Resources and Policy and
Partnerships
18. To ensure that the views of BIG’s two
unions – Amicus and Prospect (including
BME and disabled members) are fully
reflected in the equality assurance and
equality impact assessment work.
Human Resources
19. To establish mechanisms for involving
BME and disabled staff in discussing BIG’s
employment policies and practices, their
experiences and methods for making
improvements.
Human Resources
Progress
BIG’s second employee survey was carried out in September
2007 and at the time the response from BME staff on corporate
leadership was no different from other group responses. At the
end of 2007, BIG decided to participate in the Sunday Times Best
Companies Survey rather than continuing with its own employee
survey. As the Best Companies Survey does not collect data on
the respondent’s ethnicity or disability status it will not therefore
be possible to analyse responses to the survey in this manner in
the future. BIG is however committed to considering an in-house
survey every few years, which would allow this issue to be picked
up.
BIG reviewed the recommendations arising from the evaluation
and re-launched the process during Summer 2007. No further
update.
Details of equality assurance completed during the last 12months can be found in Section 6.
The Corporate Equality Manager has continued to work with
HR and both unions to discuss how equality issues might best
be considered in a timely fashion. It has been agreed that the
mechanism for liaison between all parties will be clarified by HR.
We note our inability to monitor responses to our employee
survey in the future (in terms of ethnicity or disability status). The
Corporate Equality Manager will discuss (with BIG’s two unions
and HR department), alternative mechanisms for engaging with
BME and disabled staff.
27
Section 5
Task and responsibility
20. To ensure that there is no unlawful
discrimination in the appointment of BIG’s
Board and Country Committees.
Policy and Partnerships
Progress
BIG submitted its Diversity plan to the Department of Culture,
Media and Support (DCMS) in June 2007. The plan profiles the
diversity of our UK Board and Country Committees. We were
encouraged by the gender and ethnic profile of our Board but
acknowledge that representation from disabled and younger
people should be improved. A vacancy has recently arisen and we
will strive to address current areas of under-representation with
DCMS.
21. To periodically provide training to ensure All staff involved in grant assessment and grant management must
that all staff i) are aware of the race and
take part in a training course designed to ensure they consider
disability duties ii) have the necessary skills equality issues in carrying out their roles.
relating to the implementation of the duties, BIG purchased an E-learning equality and diversity package, which
and iii) have sufficient levels of race and
was made available to all staff in 2008. The package covers a wide
disability equality awareness in carrying out range of equality (including race and disability) issues and includes
their day to day jobs.
a test to check learning.
Human Resources and Policy and
BIG is currently reviewing its provision for equality and diversity
Partnerships
learning and development opportunities and piloted a more
comprehensive package in December 2008.
22. To ensure that all relevant training
A checklist to assist in integrating equality issues into relevant
programmes include reference to disability
programmes is currently being piloted in relation to Operational
and ethnicity issues where relevant.
training programmes. Early indications suggest that the checklist is
Human Resources, Operations and
proving helpful.
Policy and Partnerships
23. To ensure that all Board and committee Board members and a selection of committee members attended
members participate in an equality session
an equalities session in January 2008 which included a briefing on
as part of induction and receive regular
BIG’s equality responsibilities and legislative requirements.
briefings on relevant changes in legislation
BIG’s guidance for Board/ Committee members on our equality
and good practice and their implications for legislative responsibilities was updated.
BIG.
Members also receive equality guidance at induction.
Planning and Performance and
Operations.
28
Section 5
Task and responsibility
24. The following shall apply where a
procurement requiring a full business case is
carried out:
A) If the contract is for a service which
involves dealing directly with either our
customers or our staff (or job applicants),
then the selection shall include, as a
criterion, the ability of the supplier to
effectively apply our equal opportunities
policy (including the race and disability
equality duties) including, as appropriate, the
provision of training and induction to their
own staff.
B) If the contract is for the supply of
staff then the selection shall include as
a criterion the effective application of an
equal opportunities policy by the supplier,
adequate to enable us to discharge our own
equalities duties in relation to those staff.
Corporate Services
25. To ensure that BIG’s commitment to
accessible internal communication (that is,
font type and size) is adhered to.
Communications and Marketing
26. To meet the commitments outlined in
our Positive About Disability (two ticks)
Award and to raise general awareness of the
award among staff.
Human Resources
27. To review BIG’s procurement policy to
ensure it meets the requirements of the race
and disability duties.
Corporate Services
28.To periodically remind staff of the
availability of the employee assistance
programme (to support staff in terms of
crisis).
Human Resources
Progress
We are currently reviewing our staff procurement guidance
and factoring in equality issues as part of this process. A key
development will be guidance, which helps internal stakeholders
identify whether equality is a core requirement of a contract and
what steps to take accordingly.
Guidance on BIG’s accessible internal communication (minimum
standards) are clearly posted on BIG’s intranet.
We have made a commitment to review BIG’s compliance with the
Award in the autumn of each year and take action as required.
As per action 24.
The availability of BIG’s employee assistance programme will
be highlighted in a new stress policy which is currently under
development. 29
Section 5
Task and responsibility
1. To continue monitoring requests
for publications in alternative formats
and community languages and
identifying priorities for strategic action.
Communications and Marketing
2. To review beneficiary equality monitoring
data i.e. application and success rates, by
ethnicity and disability status, for each
programme twice a year. To incorporate this
information into our equality assurance work
and identify and implement actions where
appropriate.
Policy and Partnerships and Operations
3. To 1) integrate an equality perspective
into the specifications of relevant evaluation
and research initiatives; and 2) continue to
review the results from relevant research
to inform all aspects of funding policy and
practice.
Policy and Partnerships
4. To conduct UK-wide research into the
public’s attitudes to BIG, review findings (by
ethnicity and disability) and identify action
points.
Policy and Partnerships
30
Progress
Requests for publications in alternative formats and languages
were very low (seven) and much lower than the previous year (28
in total). Requests for materials in alternative formats consisted of
four Braille, two large-print and one audio-tape. We also used the
language line service once, to communicate with a Polish speaker.
We are currently in the process of reviewing how we classify, collate,
analyse and report on beneficiary equality monitoring data. As part
of this work we carried out research in March 2008 to identify
how we could improve the reliability of the data we capture. The
recommendations from the research are being considered in the
design of our future funding processes and IT system (2009+).
In 2008-09 we will also be introducing some further changes to
improve the quality of the data we currently capture.
1) In April 2008, BIG agreed that ’the promotion of equality’, or
similar wording, should be a core requirement within future
grant programmes, where such powers exist and where
equality is relevant. This will provide us with the future
possibility of designing evaluations that measure equality
performance.
2) A number of reports and summaries have been commissioned
during the last 12-months, the results of which will inform
future policy and practice. See section 5 for further details.
In October 2008, BIG also published a good practice guide on user
involvement. Focusing on involving potential users in research.
In November 2007 the British Market Research Bureau was
commissioned to carry out research designed to measure the
general public’s awareness of BIG, and their attitude towards BIG
and Lottery funding in general.
In 2008, BIG commissioned a further, focused, omnibus survey to
assess public awareness of BIG. See section 5 for further details. Section 5
Task and responsibility
5. To establish mechanisms for involving
external organisations in discussing the
equality dimension of BIG’s business (to
include race and disability groups).
Policy and Partnerships
Progress
During 2008 BIG held meetings with a number of strategic
equality organisations with a view to establishing ongoing
dialogue, for example meetings with CEMVO (Council for Ethnic
Minority Voluntary Organisations) and the London Third Sector
BME regional event. We will continue to explore opportunities for
promoting positive relations with key agencies.
BIG also contributed to the publication Diverse Britain 2008.
The Home Office is the lead sponsor of the publication, which
aims to examine and disseminate best practice among a wide
range of public and private sector bodies. We see participation in
this publication as a mechanism for identifying and subsequently
working with other key partners.
BIG’s open Board meeting in November 2008 included
representatives from a range of equality organisations, including
those with a particular interest in disability and ethnicity issues.
6. Develop voluntary and community sector Independent research was commissioned in 2007 to assess
research (survey to key stakeholders),
key stakeholders’ levels of confidence in BIG and to help us
review findings by ethnicity and disability
to improve our knowledge and understanding of how we are
and identify action points.
perceived by our key stakeholders. A decision was taken not to
Policy and Partnerships
repeat the survey in 2008 due to the extensive consultation
activity-taking place this year.
7. To continue monitoring whether Freedom In the last 12 months, BIG received six race and four disability
of Information requests lead to race or
related freedom of information (FOI) requests (out of a total of
disability complaints and identify action
135). Most of the requests related to information regarding specific
points.
applications and all were granted, bar one which was withdrawn and
Policy and Partnerships
another because the information was already in the public domain.
None of the FOI requests led to complaints of discrimination.
8. To ensure that any customer satisfaction From December 2007 to February 2008 we piloted an online
survey carried out allows for a review of
customer satisfaction survey, the results of which have
findings by disability and race.
subsequently informed our customer service action plan. Our next
Policy and Partnerships
survey, which we actively marketed, ran from 1 September 2008
to 31 October 2008 and the results are currently being analysed.
9. To consider ways to improve attendance Feedback from staff working within information and events teams
among BME groups at BIG’s external events. indicated that this was not currently an issue because of the
Communications and Marketing (in
low number of events attended by BIG and the locus of control
conjunction with country offices)
regarding invitation lists lying with helper agencies. This will be
kept under review.
31
Section 5
Task and responsibility
10. To explore how we can meet the access
requirements of British Sign language users
and people with learning disabilities.
Policy and Partnerships
11. To pilot an online (interactive) form
which affords greater accessibility for
applicants and award holders.
Communications and Marketing
12. To explore further with relevant bodies
BIG’s policy on not accepting completed
application and monitoring forms in
alternative formats.
Operations, Policy and Partnerships and
Communications and Marketing
Progress
In the last 12 months BIG received no requests for publications
in BSL format. BIG’s approach continues to be that interpreter
support is offered as an alternative. During 2008 BIG explored
the option accessing a BSL video-conference service on a case-by
case basis. Ultimately, it was determined that this arrangement
would not be sufficiently cost or time efficient. BIG is currently
reviewing the BSL interpretation support arrangements in place
within its regional and country offices to ensure that they meet
current business needs.
We received one access request in respect of a project, which
worked with people with a learning disability, which was solved
by producing our application materials in Word version, to afford
greater accessibility.
BIG launched its online form in March 2007 with The People’s
Millions programme. Our customer survey indicated that most
people found it easy to use. No update.
This measure was explored during the reporting period. BIG’s
approach continues to be that we do not accept completed
application and monitoring forms in audio visual/DVD or CD format.
During the year we were contacted by a small number of
individuals who expressed difficulties using some of our PDF and
RTF forms because their screen reader software could not read
the protected question or explanation text. In most cases the best
solution was to reproduce the forms in plain Word format. We
have noted this issue and will ensure that screen reader/writer
considerations are built into the development of our new online
system as far as possible.
13. To discuss internally the most efficient
We reviewed our arrangements in 2007 and again in 2008
ways of producing publications in alternative (following a proposal made through our staff suggestion scheme)
formats.
and are satisfied that they continue to offer us an efficient and
Communications and Marketing
customer focused service.
14. To take action to ensure that key staff
Front line customer enquiries are redirected to our externally
are competent in using textphone and all
contracted information and advice service – Broadcasting and
reception desks have access to induction
Support Services, who are trained in using textphone. Members of
loops.
our Information and Policy teams support these calls. No update.
Corporate Facilities
32
Section 5
Task and responsibility
15. To ensure that BIG’s website and Intranet
meet accessibility standards.
Communications and Marketing
Progress
As a result of an extensive audit in 2006, a wide range of actions
were implemented on both our external website and Intranet,
aimed at improving accessibility.
We will be using Abilitynet to audit the accessibility of our
consultation website ‘ Big Thinking’ and will subsequently
arrange for an audit of the new Big Lottery Fund site after it
has launched and additional features have been added. The new
site was designed by an agency called Fortune Cookie who are
acknowledged accessibility experts.
The Big Lottery Fund site uses XHTML and CSS with no layout
tables and background images to provide a clean experience for
screen reader and keyboard users. Although Flash and JavaScript
are used to enliven the site, they are not essential and pages
degrade gracefully if they are not available. The site can be
viewed with highly contrasting colours and there are controls to
increase the size.
To improve the quality and consistency of text on the website
we commissioned the company Sticky Content to review the old
website, train our New Media team and produce a set of format
templates. These were very successful and lessons learned are
being applied to our other sites.
16.To co-ordinate 1) equality assurance on
all new and reviewed policies and functions
relating to external functions; 2) annual
monitoring to assess the need for a full
equality impact assessment (in line with
the equality assurance timetable); and 3)
subsequent equality impact assessments.
Policy and Partnerships
We have also started adding captions to our online videos, in
addition to providing written transcripts.
Details of equality assurance completed during the last 12months can be found in section 6.
33
Section 5
Task and responsibility
17. To develop a customer care strategy
to support BIG’s customer care standards
(to include reference to BME and disabled
customers).
Policy and Partnerships
18. To re-launch BIG’s internal complaints
procedure, review level of stage two (CEO)
complaints quarterly and identify action
points.
Policy and Partnerships
Progress
BIG’s customer service strategy was approved by the Board in
November 2007. The strategy will work towards reconsidering
our position on the Customer Care Charter mark in March 2009.
A customer satisfaction survey was conducted during December
2007/January 2008, which has informed the customer service
action plan. The common customer service charter was revised
and approved by the Lottery Forum and will be published shortly.
Plans are in place to develop a new customer service training
programme.
The new internal complaints procedure was re-launched in 2007.
The spreadsheet for recording details of complaints that reach
stage 2 and Independent Complaint Reviewer stage has been
upgraded to include a prompt for staff to record when equalities
advice has been sought. Further improvements were made in
2008 to the system to ensure a similar record is consistently made
in respect of stage 1 complaints.
Further details on complaints can be found in section 4.
19. To produce an Equality Good Practice
The online guide (Equality Matters) was informally launched in July
Guidance booklet for applicants and grant- 2007. The guide was then re-launched in hard copy in July 2008,
holders.
following review and reformatting after user feedback. The guide
Policy and Partnerships, Operations and was published on the BIG website and disseminated externally at
Communications and Marketing
events. Public awareness was raised through press releases and
the BIG e-bulletin.
20. To develop an internal protocol to allow
staff to respond in an effective and efficient
way to accessibility queries from customers.
Policy and Partnerships, Communications
and Marketing and country offices.
21. To develop guidance for staff when
working with support workers and
interpreters.
Policy and Partnerships
34
Operations staff received training to raise their awareness of the
guide and a training module was also developed to enable helper
agencies to cascade the document’s key messages. The training
module has been successfully piloted in conjunction with disability
and BME helper agencies and will be formally launched in 2009.
An internal protocol is currently in use.
See section 4 for further details of requests received and
responses made by BIG.
Guidance is currently in use. BIG is also currently reviewing the BSL
interpretation support arrangements in place within its regional
and country offices to ensure that they meet current business
needs.
Section 6
Equality assurance
BIG’s equality assurance process is mandatory across all high level areas of business and is aimed at helping us to
take forward our commitment to mainstreaming equality into all aspects of our internal and external work.
The equality assurance process is designed to help staff identify and address potential adverse impacts (across nine
grounds including race and disability) when developing or reviewing business activities.
When determining the potential for adverse impact, staff must draw on information that is relevant to the
target audience of the business activity. This includes monitoring data such as funding or employment statistics,
evaluation and research findings and the results of informal consultation with relevant stakeholders. Staff must
then consider this information with the commitments set out in our equal opportunities policy (including our
equality principles) and relevant equality legislation (including the RRAA and DDA). Staff are helped in judging the
effects of our policies and functions through a set of equality prompts (see appendix two).
Where a potential adverse impact is identified staff must state whether it is justified or not. If it cannot be justified,
must be taken to remove or reduce the potential adverse impact. The equality implications of all new and
action
reviewed business activities, identified through the equality assurance process, must be brought to the attention
of decision-makers when they are deciding whether to sign off the policy or function for implementation. This
is drawn to their attention through a specific section - ‘equality implications’, which should feature in all internal
papers.
Staff are required to build in monitoring arrangements to allow the equality impact of the business activity to be
reviewed at a later stage. When reviewing the business activity they should consider whether there should be a full
Equality Impact Assessment (EQIA), involving formal consultation, if there is evidence of significant equality impact.
The equality assurance process flowchart can be found at appendix two.
This section now sets out the various areas of business, which went through the equality assurance process in the
last 12 months and drew on the findings from our information gathering outlined in section 5. As a result of our
mainstreaming approach to equality, we do not believe that there are any significant equality implications arising
from the areas of business listed in this report and we have not recommended any Equality Impact Assessments
(EQIAs). However, where appropriate we have put measures in place to enable us to continue to monitor and
review products in order to establish whether Equality Impact Assessments are recommended at any future date.
For the purposes of this report we have provided a brief summary of the aim of each area of business equality
assured and the (race and disability) results of the equality assurance process. Please contact us if you would like
any additional information.
35
Community Assets
England
Open: September 2007
Close: 15 November 2007
£150,000 - £1 million
Total: £30 million
Policy/function
Advice Plus England
Open: 12 November 2007
Close: 1 April 2008
£10,000 - £500,000
Total: £20 million
BASIS 2 England
Open: 7 May 2008
Close: 27 August 2008
£10,000 - £500,00 (and
£750,00 for England-wide
projects)
Total: £50 million
Grant Programmes
England
36
BIG is delivering Community Assets
on behalf of the Office of the Third
Sector. This is non-Lottery funding.
The aim of Community Assets is
community empowerment. It will
do this by facilitating the transfer of
genuine assets from local authorities
to the third sector for their use as
community resources.
This programme will distribute
funds to voluntary and community
sector infrastructure organisations in
order to improve the effectiveness
of voluntary and community
organisations.
Explanation
This programme will fund projects
that benefit the people who need
advice and the organisations that
provide it.
Results
Instructions were inserted into the
programme specific assessment guidance for
grant staff to check if the applicant had any
specific communication needs.
No EQIA required.
Application materials, priorities for
When developing our regional priority lists
funding, requirements for applicants
we included targeted provision (e.g. disability
that their projects reach diverse
voluntary and community organisations) in a
groups, Specifications for partnerships number of areas.
completed in February 2008.
We made it clearer in our guidance notes and
priorities:
i) that projects need to have explicit
strategies to reach out to all “subdivisions” of
the voluntary sector.
ii) that partnerships will need to demonstrate
experience of reaching a diverse range of
groups.
We will also consider using part of
the evaluation budget to examine the
effectiveness of targeted approaches to
providing infrastructure support.
No EQIA required.
Assessment manual, setting up your
Guidance was inserted into the assessment
grant manual and associated forms,
manual advising grant staff that for all contact
capital checklist assessment guidance with applicants they should consider any
documents, capital delivery plan
adjustments that may be appropriate in order
guidance and grant management
to respond to any specific needs.
manual completed in November
Grant induction manual was amended to
2007.
advise grant staff to remind grant holders of
our commitment to equalities and refer them
to BIG’s Equality Matters guide.
No EQIA required.
Equality assurance status
Round 2 – application form, guidance
notes, assessment manual and
programme specific assessment
guidance completed in October 2007.
37
Policy/function
Young Peoples Fund (YPF)
England
Open: 23 September 2004
Close: Dates vary per strand.
£5,000-£150,000
Total: £257.5 million
Explanation
The programme is primarily a revenue
programme that can fund activities
that directly benefit young people
(aged 0-25) and occur out of school
hours. £157.5 million of the YPF
should be tightly focused on projects
designed to promote youth inclusion,
specifically by providing facilities and
activities for young people in both
after school and holiday periods.
£100 million of the total has been
allocated to empower more young
people in England. Currently 7
strands of work make up the Young
Peoples Fund. Four are ‘ring fenced
programmes’:1 – out of school hours learning:
school sport coordinators £28.4
million
2 – positive activities for young
people - £25 million
3 – extended schools - £14 million
4 – Do it for Real - £12.5 million
Three are open programmes:5 – National Grants - £27.6 million
6 – Grants to Organisations - £40
million
7 – The Big Boost (grants to
individuals) - £10 million.
Equality assurance status
Assessment manual documents
(which include the programme
specific template and two additional
documents covering young people’s
involvement and sustainable
development guidance). Local
grants application materials review.
Responses to Outline Proposals
– Reasons and Letter text. Local
Grants outline proposal manual. All
Completed by April 2008.
Results
The Equal opportunities question within
Local Grants application form were amended
to clarify that applicants were expected
to demonstrate how their project and
organisation would show a commitment to
BIG’s equality principles. In addition emphasis
was placed on the need to demonstrate how
young people with a range of needs would
be engaged in the development, delivery and
review of the project.
EQIA not required.
2014 Communities Small Grants
Programme
Open: 10 November 2008
Close: TBC
£1,000 max
Total: £6.8 million
Policy/function
Primetime Scotland
Open: August 2007
Close: December 2007
£500,000
Scotland
38
Explanation
Through the Primetime
programme we want to fund
projects that will help make
older people healthier and active
and give them a greater sense
of well-being. We also want
this money to help improve
interaction and understanding
between the older population
and young people.
A bespoke micro grants
programme pilot (year 1
only) for groups, clubs and
organisations to increase the
number and range of people
participating and volunteering
in sport and physical activity.
To promote individual and
community health and wellbeing and promote community
integration as part of the 2014
Commonwealth Games.
Funding framework, Letter Text and
Response Reasons for consideration/
comment and Guide to managing
the grant leaflet (non-toolkit) all
completed by October 2008.
Equality assurance status
Note the Prime Time assessment
manual did not go through equality
assurance. The programme will
be using the generic (direct high
volume) grant management manual
which has already been equality
assured.
The outcomes and all documentation were
amended to refer to sport OR physical
activity rather than AND. This should make
the programme more inclusive.
Disabled people and people from BME
communities will be targeted within the
programme on the basis of evidence of low
participation rates.
No EQIA required.
Results
No EQIA required.
Explanation
‘Healthy families’ is made up
of 2 programmes: Child’s Play
and Way of Life. Through the
Healthy Families Initiative, BIG
wants to promote healthy and
active lifestyles amongst children
and families by creating a joined
up approach to children’s play,
healthy eating and physical
activity.
This programme aims to bring
people together to make their
communities stronger and to
improve their rural and urban
environments. Programme
outcomes due are:
●● revitalised communities
●● improved community relations
●● enhanced local environments
●● community amenities
Policy/function
Healthy Families
Child’s Play:
Open: 30/10/2006
Close: 04/05/07 (Infrastructure
project) and 06/03/2009
(Infrastructure and Play projects)
Infrastructure – up to £250,000
Play - £250,000 to 1 million
Way of Life:
Open: 22/01/2007
Close: 27/06/2007
£7million
People and Places Wales
Open: 30th November 2005
Close: TBC
£5,000 - £1 million
Total: £66 million
Wales
39
Results
The grant set up manual was amended to
include reference to BIG’s Equality Matters
guide within the grant set up meeting.
EQIA not required.
The Guide to your Grant was amended to
include reference to the availability of the
Equality Matters guide within section on
project delivery.
The Grant set up manual was amended to
include reference to BIG’s Equality Matters
guide within the grant set up meeting.
The Grant management manuals amended
to include reference to the need to
complete equality monitoring as part of
the end of grant report.
EQIA not required.
Operational review (grant assessment The text stating the availability of the
and grant management manuals)
Outline proposal form, Before you Apply,
completed in June 2008.
application form and guidance notes in
alternative formats, was revised to reflect
BIG’s current position
The availability of BIG’s Equality Matters
was highlighted in the Before you Apply
document, guidance notes and grant
management manual, indicating that it is a
good practice guide that can be used when
planning and managing a project.
No EQIA required.
Guide to your grant, Grant set up
and Grant management manuals
completed in February 2008.
Equality assurance status
Grant set up and management
manuals plus business plan review
completed in October 2007.
Stepping Stones Wales
Open: 28th June 2006
Close: 29th June 2007
£250,000 - £1 million
Total: £15 million
Policy/function
Promoting Mental Health and WellBeing Wales
Open: 27th February 2007
Close: 28th September 2007
£250,000 - £1 million
Total: £15 million
Policy/function
Building Change Trust
Open: March 2007
There will be a single grant of £10m
given as an endowment, expendable
over ten years between 2008 and
2018.
Northern Ireland
40
Two stage grant set up and
management manuals plus end
of year and end of grant reports.
Completed by November 2007.
Equality assurance status
Guide to your grant, Grant set up
and grant management manuals.
Completed in February 2008.
Explanation
Equality assurance status
The aim for the Building Change Application materials and assessment
Trust, and for the work it
manuals completed by March 2008.
supports, is to build the capacity
of the Voluntary and Community
Sector by equipping it to meet
the changing needs of Northern
Ireland communities.
Explanation
This programme will support
community-based projects that
help people with mental health
problems to live productive lives
as part of their communities.
The programme aims to:1) Promote the rehabilitation
and independence of people
with serious mental health
problems
2) Support people at greatest
risk of serious mental health
problems or suicide
This programme provides
funding for people to develop
the life skills that will help
them to manage their lives and
contribute to their communities
or to reengage in learning,
volunteering or employment.
Results
The assessment manual criterion was
amended to refer explicitly to the need to
meet the requirements of BIG’s equality
principles.
An additional judgement point was included
in the assessment manual to highlight
that equalities issues should be taken
into consideration in terms of project
delivery, intended outcomes and how
the various focus areas will be addressed.
Also that there should be evidence that
BIG’s equality principles will be adequately
addressed.
The grant set up manual was amended to
include reference to the need for grant
staff to refer to the Equality Matters guide
during the grant set up meeting.
EQIA not required.
Results
The guide to your grant was amended to
include reference to the availability of the
Equality Matters guide within the section
on project delivery.
The grant management manual was
amended to include reference to the need
to complete equality monitoring as part of
the end of grant report.
No EQIA required.
41
This two-stage programme
aims to increase learning
opportunities and promote
well-being among Northern
Ireland’s most disadvantaged
communities.
Live and Learn
Open: October 2006
Close: Stage one – 29 March 2007 £20,000 - £25,000
Stage two – 30 April 2008 £600,000 - £1 million.
Total: £18 million
Reaching Communities NI
Open: 27th April 2006
£100,000 - £500, 000
Total: £18 million to be awarded by
2009.
Projects must meet one of our
four key outcomes:
●● people have the opportunity to
achieve their full potential
●● people can actively participate
in their communities to bring
about a positive change.
●● community ownership of
better and safer rural and
urban environments.
●● improved physical and mental
health for all people.
Safe and Well
This programme aims to improve
Open: November 2006
the lives of the most disadvantaged
Close: Stage one – 31 July 2007 - up communities in Northern Ireland
to £50,000
by funding preventative projects
Stage two –29 October 2008 that promote well-being. Safe and
£600,000 - £1million
Well will encourage communities to
Total: £18 million
work together to tackle health and
safety issues.
Explanation
This programme aims to
refurbish or modernise existing
community venues in order to
increase the level of community
use and enhance the quality of
the services provided.
Policy/function
Improving Community Buildings
Open: 26 September 2006
Close: 24 May 2007
£25,000 - £50,000
Total: £5 million
It was felt that the review has
strengthened the programme guidance
notes and application materials, resulting
in a much clearer and more accessible
application process.
Clarification was made within the OPF and
application forms that BIG will respond to
communication requirements in relation to
accessing the materials.
No EQIA required.
No amendments made.
EQIA not required.
Review of programme (programme
guidance notes, outline proposal
form (OPF), application form, and
programme leaflet) completed in July
2007 – reporting retrospectively.
Programme specific assessment
materials completed in July 2008.
Programme specific assessment
materials for stage two completed
in July 2008 and then review of
programme completed in September
2008.
Results
The guidance notes were amended
to highlight that applications, where
appropriate would be expected to consider
disability access and the DDA.
Application materials were amended to
ensure that explicit reference was made
to the need for project’s to demonstrate a
commitment to BIG’s equality principles.
EQIA not required.
No amendments made.
EQIA not required.
Equality assurance status
Application materials and preapplication support and development
contract. Post award materials; guide
to your grant, grant set up manual,
grant management manual, grant
offer pack, your next big steps pack
and post award support contracts all completed by September 2008
International Programme
£72.5 million. 4 strands.
i) International Communities (plus
Tsunami)
Open: 29 March 2006
Close: 30 April 2008
£50,000 - £500,000
Total: £30 million (plus £12 million)
ii) International Small Grants
Open: 26 July 2006
Close: 31 January 2008
£500 - £10,000
Total: £500,000
iii) International Strategic
Open: 26 July 2006
Close: 26 January 2007
£1million - £5 million
Total: £30 million
Policy/function
Breathing Places UK wide
Phase 3
Open: October 2007
Close: TBC
£300 - £10,000
Total: £5 million
UK wide
42
Explanation
This programme complements the
BBC’s Breathing Places campaign
and is designed to provide funding
for small groups. It has two aims:1) Increase participation and
access to local breathing
places by encouraging people
to become actively involved
in them, and by supporting
activities that are openly
accessible to everyone.
2)Make a lasting improvement
to the local environment by
supporting activities and develop
existing breathing places or help
create and sustain new ones.
This programme will support work
that tackles the causes of poverty
and deprivation and brings about
a long-term difference to the lives
of the most disadvantaged people
across the globe.
Funding for the sustainable
development and reconstruction of
areas affected by the Tsunami will
be delivered through International
Communities.
iii) International Strategic (stage 2)
application form/guidance notes
and programme specific assessment
guidance completed in October 2008.
iii) Clarification was made within the
application form that BIG will respond to
communication requirements in relation
to accessing the materials. Also explicit
reference was made to BIG’s Equality
Matters and how applicants can access
it.
No EQIA required.
Equality assurance status
Results
Grant management manual completed No amendments made.
in April 2008.
EQIA not required.
Policy/function
Research Grants Programme UK
Open: Spring 2007
Close: 2009
Total: £25 million
Policy/function
Award Partner post award materials
Grant making processes
43
Explanation
To provide guidance to grant
holders and grant staff regarding
post award procedures associated
with Award partner schemes.
Explanation
The aim of this programme will
be to influence local and national
policy and practice by funding
the production and dissemination
of evidence based knowledge. In
the longer term the programme,
through the production of sound
evidence, aims to help develop
better services and interventions
for beneficiaries. The delivery
of the programme is to be
outsourced. We are seeking
to issue two contracts. The
main contract: Delivery of the
programme and the development
contract: Delivery of support.
Equality assurance status
Guide to your grant scheme. Types
and frequency of monitoring events.
Award partner grant set up manual.
Setting up your grant scheme.
Starting your grant scheme. Award
partner payment claim. All completed
by June 2008.
Equality assurance status
Application receipt and assessment:
guidance for assessors and
assessment manual completed in
February 2008.
Results
The grant set up manual was amended
to advise grant staff to remind the
Award partner of their commitment to
implementing and regularly reviewing
their equal opportunities policy.
It was decided not to include reference
to Equality Matters in the ‘Guide to
your grant’ as this document is about
the grant scheme and not the individual
projects.
EQIA not required.
Reference has also now been made to
the internal equality principles guidance
within the manual.
No EQIA required.
Results
The following assessment points were
added into the assessment manual:
●● ‘If the research involves working
with people, does the approach and
methodology meet BIG’s equality
principles?’
●● Is there clear evidence that BIG’s
equality principles have been
acknowledged in the design and
management of the project.
44
Policy/function
Business process re-engineering
Explanation
Equality assurance status
BIG has committed to a major
Processes and requirements
business process re-engineering
completed in April 2008.
(BPR) programme in order to
close the gap between our current
position and our goal of being
an intelligent funder and leading
innovator. This will also facilitate
our new capability to deliver
non-Lottery funding programmes
and enhance our capability to
distribute funding through means
other than direct grants, including
contracts, endowments, loans and
external delegation of direct grant
programmes. The programme will
deliver changes to our current
processes and systems and
make greater use of technology
to support our operational
relationship with customers,
including an enhanced online
capability.
Results
Online system
At the end of this programme there will
be an online interface for applicants and
grant holders that will integrate directly
with our internal funding-management
systems. Amendments were made
in order to ensure that paper-based
customers receive service as equitable as
those using the online system.
Communication
Amendments were made to ensure that
the process is as flexible as possible
in order to meet the communication
needs of applicants and grant holders.
Measures have been put in place for
those without access to email, BIG will
retain paper communication and will be
flexible enough to meet the preferred
communication method of customers.
Information required
Amendments were made to the type and
amount of information collected through
the new online application system.
Equality information will be collected
throughout the whole of the application
stage in order to ensure that the correct
information is collected. Beneficiary
monitoring information is very important
to BIG as it identifies any gaps in our
service provision. BIG also recognised
the potential negative impact of frontloading applicants with too many
information requests.
EQIA not required.
45
Completed in December 2007.
This creates a transfer process to
handle any application or grant
transfer request
Grant transfers process
Disputes process
This project made
recommendations to the Business
Process Re-engineering (BPR)
project team on BIG’s IT system
and data requirements relating to
geographical project areas.
The disputes process ensures that Completed in August 2008
any concerns about grants are
dealt with promptly in a methodical
and consistent way.
Data coding project
Equality assurance status
Grant application forms (excluding
OPF)
Programme guidance notes
Grant assessment manuals and
programme specific templates
Grant set up manuals. All Completed
in April 2008.
Completed in April 2008.
Explanation
To ensure that appropriate links
are made to BIG’s Equality Matters
guide in all generic programme
development materials.
Policy/function
Changes to toolkit (generic
programme development) materials
The term ‘vulnerable adult’ has given
rise to some confusion in the past and
hence the disputes manual has been
updated with the definition from the
Safeguarding Vulnerable Adults Act
2006.
A link was provided to BIG’s Equality
Matters guide under the ‘Employment
mismanagement’ section of the manual
as it provides information on recruitment
and selection good practice.
The areas where non-compliance of
statutory obligations could arise was
widened to include all anti-discrimination
and equality legislation (including the
positive duties).
EQIA not required.
No amendments made.
EQIA not required.
No amendments made.
EQIA not required.
Results
Amendments were made to all materials
to ensure that appropriate links were
made to BIG’s Equality Matters Guide
in all generic programme development
materials.
EQIA not required.
Toolkit (generic programme
development) forms and guidance
Policy/function
Refunds project
Confidentiality (review)
Coaching
Policy/function
Absence due to sickness (review)
Human Resources Policies
46
Explanation
The policy is designed to manage
sickness absence and to ensure
that all employees are treated in a
fair and consistent way when they
are unwell.
Sets out the arrangements for
developing excellence in the quality
of BIG’s leadership and approach
to people management through
coaching.
The policy sets out the principles of
confidentiality and procedures for
how information should be used.
Explanation
Provides clear and consistent
guidance/forms on making
refunds.
To provide standardised guidance
to grants staff/applicants.
Completed in September 2008.
Completed in September 2008.
Equality assurance status
Completed in September 2008.
Changes to your grant form
(external form).
Making changes to your grant
application
information
(internal assessment guidance).
Quarterly monitoring report
(external form)
Review of QMR
(internal guidance).
Completed by June 2008.
Equality assurance status
Refunds letters.
Completed by September 2008.
No amendments made.
No EQIA required.
No amendments made.
No EQIA required.
Results
No amendments made.
No EQIA required.
No amendments made.
EQIA not required.
Results
No amendments made.
EQIA not required.
47
This policy sets out the types of
Completed in September 2008.
flexible working options available to
staff.
Sets out arrangements for
managing leave requests.
To ensure that employees are
managed fairly, equitably and
consistently during their notice
period and when leaving BIG
Flexible working (review)
Maternity (review)
Notice (review)
Completed in September 2008.
Completed in September 2008.
Sets out the arrangements for staff Completed in September 2008.
working on fixed term contracts.
Explanation
Equality assurance status
Sets out how everyone working for Completed in September 2008.
BIG has the right to be treated with
dignity and respect at work. BIG
will actively promote behaviours
and standards which value and
respect others.
BIG’s employee performance
Completed in September 2008.
management is a systematic
approach to improving and
developing the performance and
competence of individuals and
teams in order to increase overall
organisation effectiveness.
Fixed term contracts (review)
Employee performance management
(EPM) (review)
Policy/function
Dignity at work (review)
It was noted that there is no longer a
need for specific equality objectives to
be set.
HR is currently exploring whether when
setting their activities (underneath their
objectives) staff/managers should be
advised to ensure that BIG’s equality
principles are reflected in relevant
activities.
No EQIA required.
No amendments made.
No EQIA required.
Policy has been amended to take
account of changes in statutory
entitlements, which affect parents of
disabled children.
EQIA not required.
No amendments made.
No EQIA required.
It had been recommended that it would
be helpful if the policy explained who
had responsibility for following up any
issues of note arising from the responses
received through the exit interview/
questionnaire. This will be considered
when the exit interview process is
reviewed in the near future.
No EQIA required.
Results
No amendments made.
No EQIA required.
48
Sets out the arrangements for BIG
recovering any money that has
been overpaid to employees.
Sets out the pay protection
arrangements for staff employed
by BIG’s legacy organisations as at
30 June 2005 who were affected
by the introduction of the new
grades.
Sets out the arrangements for
all those individuals employed by
BIG who might be called upon or
requested to provide references
in respect of current or former
employees of BIG.
Sets out the arrangements for the
retention of employee personal
information in line with legal
requirements.
Overpayment
Retention of employee personal
information
Reference (review)
Pay protection (review)
Explanation
This system aims to improve BIG’s
recruitment process. A new online
application form and recruitment
process will be implemented.
Policy/function
Online recruitment
Completed in September 2008.
Completed in September 2008.
Completed in September 2008.
Completed in September 2008.
Equality assurance status
Completed in June 2008.
No amendments made.
No EQIA required.
No amendments made.
No EQIA required.
No amendments made.
No EQIA required.
Results
All requests from disabled candidates
regarding reasonable adjustments will
now be recorded on the IT system
alongside details of the nature of the
requests, how they were dealt with,
how long it took for us to respond and
whether or not the candidate was happy
with our response. HR will review this
information on a 6-month basis. We also
have the facility for candidates to apply
using a Word version of the application
form. Disabled candidates will be advised
to contact our HR dept (via a prompt on
our website and printed job ads) if they
have access requirements.
No EQIA required.
No amendments made.
No EQIA required.
Whistle-blowing
Policy/function
Secondment
Policy/function
Corporate Plan 2008-09
Other policies
49
Explanation
It describes our corporate
objectives and priority activities,
our planned grant-making activity,
the grant budgets and the
operating cost budget.
Equality assurance status
Completed in June 2008.
Explanation
Equality assurance status
Sets out the arrangements for
Completed in September 2008.
inward and outward secondment
opportunities
BIG recognises that there may be
Completed in September 2008.
circumstances when a member
of staff feels unable to report
suspicions of fraud, breaches of BIG
policies or procedures and other
misconduct to their manager in the
normal way. This policy is to deal
with these and similar situations
– the reporting is then called
‘whistleblowing’.
Results
No amendments made.
EQIA not required.
No amendments made.
No EQIA required.
Results
No amendments made.
No EQIA required.
Appendix 1
Big Lottery Fund equality principles
BIG has adopted six equality principles that underpin
all our work across the UK. These are:
Promoting accessibility
We believe that accessible services are those that
people can use relatively easily, without spending
too much time and money, and are sensitive to the
different cultures of the people using them.
Valuing cultural diversity
We value cultural diversity by recognising that people
have different needs, beliefs, values and abilities and
that those differences need to be both respected and
promoted. We recognise that having a diverse public
face can help us build trust and confidence among
the varied communities we seek to fund. A diverse
workforce can also provide a richer mix of ideas and
talents. We also believe we are more efficient and
effective when our decision-making structures are
reflective of the diverse views of society.
Promoting participation
Our new policies, processes and programmes must
be developed on the basis of real need. This means
that the people who will be affected by them
should be involved in their development. We know
that there are groups that are traditionally underrepresented in consultation processes. We need to
work in partnership with those groups to establish
structures that will help them to take a more active
role in shaping the work that we do. In this way we
will be able to encourage participation, openness and
honesty.
50
Promoting equality of opportunity
We recognise that some groups commonly
experience poorer access to employment, have fewer
training opportunities and are under-represented in
the workforce, particularly at senior level. In addition,
we know that not all groups have the same access to
services and their experiences of receiving services
may be poorer. We believe that in order to level the
playing field we may need to treat people differently,
to help them have the same chance to participate in
employment and service opportunities.
Promoting inclusive communities
We believe an inclusive community is one where
people feel they belong and where their lives are
appreciated and valued. People have similar life
opportunities and strong and positive relationships
develop between people who are from different
backgrounds.
Reducing disadvantage and exclusion
We will fund initiatives that deal with the causes of
disadvantage and exclusion and target our money
on initiatives that promote inclusion of groups at
greatest risk of being disadvantaged and excluded.
Our understanding of what ‘disadvantaged’ and
‘excluded’ mean will take account of such factors as
people’s experience of discrimination.
Appendix 2
Scoping
Screening
Implementation
Equality assurance flow-chart
What is the policy/ function’s working title?
What is the policy or function’s aim?
Are there any other related policies or functions, which could be linked up to this process?
What potential impacts (both positive and negative) do you think this policy or
function could have on the equality groups? Refer to the equality prompts.
What information might you need to help you understand the potential impacts
of this policy or function in more detail?
What is your plan of action for gathering this? information?
In the light of this new information, do you need to review your list of potential impacts?
Where you have identified potential negative impacts, do you think they can be justified?
If not, what options do you have for reducing or removing these negative impacts?
Are there any options for increasing the positive impacts of the policy/function?
How will you check if these options are feasible with relevant stakeholders?
Which of these options do you plan to propose? Can your team take a decision on any of
these options or do you need to escalate them up to a body such as a management board.
If following decision-taking further amendments have been made to the policy/function, you will
need to repeat the process from step 4. If not, you should continue with the next step.
How will you measure the actual impact of the policy/function on each of the equality groups?
51
Appendix 2
Equality prompts
When developing or reviewing the policy or function
have you considered that different equality groups
may have different needs and experiences in relation
to it?
The following triggers may help you consider
whether or not particular groups are likely to be
affected differently?
Are there any criteria that could deny access or
disadvantage a group or groups?
Could any groups experience greater difficulty,
discomfort, time, cost, inconvenience, or indignity in
relation to the policy or function, compared to other
groups?
Could this policy or function impact
disproportionately on one or more of the groups?
Is there any indication that particular groups may
have higher or lower participation rates, in respect to
this policy or function, compared to others?
Are there any opportunities to adjust this policy or
function and (a) promote equality of opportunity
(b) accommodate diversity or (3) promote
community cohesion/good relations, more
effectively?
52
Appendix 3
Contact details
We welcome comments and suggestions as they can
improve our services. Please send any comments to
our Corporate Equality Manager, Anne Flynn, at:
Big Lottery Fund
1 Cromac Quay
Cromac Wood
Ormeau Road
Belfast
BT7 2JD
Telephone: 02890551452
Fax: 028905511431
Textphone: 02890551431
Email: [email protected]
53