Equality Screening Performance Improvement Plan 2024-25 p4
Additional considerations
Multiple identity
|
Generally speaking, people can fall into more than one Section 75 category. Taking this into consideration, are there any potential impacts of the policy or decision on people with multiple identities? (For example; disabled minority ethnic people; disabled women; young Protestant men; and young lesbians, gay and bisexual people). |
|
Other than the impacts identified above, no further impacts have been identified for people with multiple identities. |
|
Provide details of data on the impact of the policy on people with multiple identities. Specify relevant Section 75 categories concerned. |
|
N/A |
Part 3. Screening decision
|
If the decision is not to conduct an equality impact assessment, please provide details of the reasons. |
|
The Performance Improvement Plan 2024/25 is envisaged to have a positive impact for all Section 75 groups. Minor negative impacts can be mitigated against. |
|
If the decision is not to conduct an equality impact assessment the public authority should consider if the policy should be mitigated or an alternative policy be introduced – please provide details. |
|
As the minor negatives can be remedied against by providing alternative formats and additional support where required, there will not be the need to mitigate or introduce an alternative policy. However, Senior Officers will be advised that further Equality Screening may be required for those projects in the delivery of the Performance Improvement Plan 2024/25, if this has not already been undertaken. |
|
If the decision is to subject the policy to an equality impact assessment, please provide details of the reasons. |
|
N/A |
Mitigation
When the public authority concludes that the likely impact is ‘minor’ and an equality impact assessment is not to be conducted, the public authority may consider mitigation to lessen the severity of any equality impact, or the introduction of an alternative policy to better promote equality of opportunity or good relations.
|
Can the policy or decision be amended or changed or an alternative policy introduced to better promote equality of opportunity and/or good relations? |
|
No |
|
If so, give the reasons to support your decision, together with the proposed changes or amendments or alternative policy. |
|
Minor negative impacts are in relation to accessibility to read the Performance Improvement Plan document itself. To mitigate this Council are providing alternative formats and additional support where required. There will not be the need to mitigate or introduce an alternative policy. Senior Officers will be advised that further Equality Screening may be required for those projects in the delivery of the Performance Improvement Plan if this has not already been undertaken. Council will consult with its Age-Friendly Co-Ordinator regularly to ensure it is doing its upmost to mitigate any adverse impact on older people. |
Timetabling and prioritising
Factors to be considered in timetabling and prioritising policies for equality impact assessment.
If the policy has been ‘screened in’ for equality impact assessment, then please answer the following questions to determine its priority for timetabling the equality impact assessment.
On a scale of 1-3, with 1 being the lowest priority and 3 being the highest, assess the policy in terms of its priority for equality impact assessment.
|
Priority criterion |
Rating (1-3) |
|
Effect on equality of opportunity and good relations |
|
|
Social need |
|
|
Effect on people’s daily lives |
|
|
Relevance to a public authority’s functions |
|
Note: The Total Rating Score should be used to prioritise the policy in rank order with other policies screened in for equality impact assessment. This list of priorities will assist the public authority in timetabling. Details of the Public Authority’s Equality Impact Assessment Timetable should be included in the quarterly Screening Report.
|
Is the policy affected by timetables established by other relevant public authorities? If yes, please provide details. |
|
|
Part 4. Monitoring
Public authorities should consider the guidance contained in the Commission’s Monitoring Guidance for Use by Public Authorities (July 2007).
The Commission recommends that where the policy has been amended or an alternative policy introduced, the public authority should monitor more broadly than for adverse impact (See Benefits, P.9-10, paras 2.13 – 2.20 of the Monitoring Guidance).
Effective monitoring will help the public authority identify any future adverse impact arising from the policy which may lead the public authority to conduct an equality impact assessment, as well as help with future planning and policy development.
Part 5 - Approval and authorisation
|
Equality Screening undertaken by: |
Performance Project Officer |
|
Date Completed: |
24 April 2024 |
|
Equality Screening approved by: |
Assistant Director of Citizen Focus |
|
Date Completed: |
25 April 2024 |