Making a difference.

A user's view on the impact of research in improving equality and human rights.

Dr. Marc VerlotForesight Director

Equality and Human Rights Commissionmarc.verlot@equalityhumanrights.com

My take on the matter

• Research is essential to make a tangible and lasting difference on equality and human rights

• Good communication of findings necessary but by no means sufficient

• Need to set out what impact it aspires (and why)

• Has consequences for framing for the research questions, research programming and planning of research units and funders

My perspective

• Funder and user of research to build an objective evidence base

• Working for a regulator: appropriate, proportionate and effective interventions in public and private sector

• To eliminate discrimination, reduce inequality, protect human rights and build good relations to ensure that everyone has a fair chance to participate in society.

Content

• What is impact ?

• How does the EHRC see impact ?

• Case study – Stop and Think

• Points for discussion

What is Impact

• Musings from the RSA:– Matthew Taylor blogs– Common worries: causation and time lag

• Reach, Engagement, Involvement, Transformation– Makes sense, easily applicable – Risks running out of steam towards

Transformation– Need to see it as a climbing a ladder: what goes

up, must come down.

Impact in the EHRC

• Piloting an approach

• Seeks a 5 year horizon and works back to 3 and 1 years

• Includes social impact, institutional outcomes, input and resources

Issue - problem

Intended Impact on society

Intended policy/practice outcomes by institutions

Actions by institutions

EHRC regulatory activity

EHRC resources and skills required

5 years→

↓

→

↓

→

↓

→

↓

3 years→

↓

→

↓

→

↓

→

↓

1 year→ → → →

Causal –impact approach

Alert of problem

or risk

Key component

or driver

Promising approaches

Changes needed from institutions

Regulatory approach by

EHRC

Specification of risk/problem and initial assessment

Impact assessment for final option appraisal and evaluation

Identify potential impact of EHRC

on this over 5-3-1 years

Identify what policy /practice

changes by institutions is required over

5-3-1 years

Intended impacts on society over

5 - 3 -1Years

(qualitative & numerical)

Identify EHRC activities and

resources required to achieve this over 5-3-1

yearsI

NB an initial broad assessment of costs, benefits, and public interest is required for the initial assessment

Problem- Aim -ImpactProblem• Ethnic minorities stopped and searched much more

by the police (Pace code A, excludes antiterrorism S&S powers) – approx. 1 million S&S a year !

• High disproportionality indicates contravening equality and human rights legislation and damaging good relations.

• Aim of project: ensure police use S&S powers proportionally and effectively to all - change underlying stereotyping towards ethnic minorities

• Intended impact: police forces are able to evidence and communicate effective use of S&S and/or reduce ethnic minority disprop. substantially in line with best practice outcomes

9

Trends over time inDisproportionality ratios

What’s happened?• 1984: S&S power introduced • c.1990: concerns raised in Parliament• 1997/8: official S&S figures confirm disprop.: black:white =

7.3:1 and Asian:white = 2.4:1• 1999: Stephen Lawrence Inquiry Report puts S& problem

on political agenda – first Gov. action plan - 1998/99 b:w = 5.9:1 and A:w = 2.1:1

• 2001: Policing within the scope of the RRA; 2001/2 b:w = 6.6:1 and A:w = 2.1:1

• 2002: Home Office sets up S & S Delivery Board and Action Team as figures got worse: 2002/3: b:w = 8.2:1 and A:w = 2.7:1.

• 2003: CRE starts FI on police employment -'Secret Policeman' broadcasted

11

What’s happened? - 2

• 2005: CRE concludes FI and serves police forces compliance notices.

• 2007: Pilots show decline in disprop. • 2009: Next Steps launched -uptake limited.• 2010: Stop & Think published• 2011: EHRC signs binding agreements with 2

forces and monitors 3 forces closely. • Early results 2011- small drop but within

margin of error)

12

Who’s done what?

13

Where are the gaps?

• Good practice examples where decreasing S&S rates go hand in hand with effective crime reduction

• Examples of effective communication between police and community groups to support focussed S&S actions

• An overall plan to transfer learning to all forces

• Non political leadership to see through emerging change – EHRC in collaboration with ACPO?

• Ownership by HO Sec of State

14

What are the opportunities and risks?

Opportunities• The Next Steps change programme provides – if continued and

evaluated – an excellent vehicle to transfer learning to all police forces

• Collaborating with UKSA inspectorate to ensure fair S&S at borders

• Stop and Think can provide operational inroads into the police to develop collaborative work in other areas such as rape rates

Risks• Discourse around cutting red tape is being used to question need

for rigorous monitoring and working with targets to reduce disproportionality

• The removal of the Commission’s good relations mandate could narrow the Commission’s scope and leave out the fundamental issue of tackling racial stereotyping within the police

15

What was essential, what can we learn ? - 1

External• Availability of long term core data crucial• Cooperate first: allegiances and credibility.• Influence environment (leadership) and build

on drivers – e.g. attitudinal changeInternal organisation• Build up expertise and provide continuity: quick

fixes don’t always work with discrimination - “because it is systemic, stupid !” to paraphrase

16

What was essential, what can we learn ? - 2

• Gather diverse team with complementary skills – matrix working and end-to-end regulation

• Team leader to set out direction, co-ordinate all strengths, and ensure we punch above our weight as we downsize.

• SMT –lead acting as internal advocateApproach• Aim to win the war, not the battle; commit to the long haul

and follow through.• Draw on all levers – EU, UN as well as domestic legislation.• Try direct and indirect approaches: tackle the context: tackle

the issue; tackle for all; tackle for 1.

17

What was essential, what can we learn ? - 3

• Master strengths and weaknesses of evidence base thoroughly - tackle head on.

• Combine data, research, theory and promising practice.

• Draw in best academics and lawyers and work with them.

• Try out approaches, step back, try something else, take risks, be creative.

• Compare performance and challenge differences .

18

Unfair use of S&S powers by police towards Black and Asian population

Intended Impact on society

Policy/practice change required by institutions

Impact EHRC expected to have on institution

EHRC regulatory activity

EHRC resources and skills required

5 yearsSignificantly improved trust and/or sense of fair treatment by police from Black and Asian population (BCS data – static ally relevant)

↓ →

Majority of police (60-70%) forces’ S&S disprop is lowest average of their family (baseline MoJ 2010)

Or have significantly increased S&S effectiveness ( higher conviction rate and crime reduction)↓ →

•S&S is standard item on political Home Office agenda and change programme is actively promoted and overseen by ACPO•Effectiveness data are published along disprop. data↓ →

•monitoring progress and publicising outcomes with key agencies and general public

•Publication of revised Stop and Think setting out achievements and future expectations↓ →

•0.2FT staff to monitor progress, 0.1 L5 oversight (Q1-Q4)•Regular press releases and briefings• small team (4x0.3 Q3) for preparation and publication

↓

3 yearsEmerging national improvement in trust and/or sense of fair treatment by police from Black and Asian population (BCS data)

↓ →

30% of police forces’ S&S disprop. is lowest average of their family (baseline MoJ 2010)Or have increased S&S effectiveness ( higher conviction rate and crime reduction• evaluation and widespread distribution of promising approaches↓ →

•HO takes political leadership of S&S improvement•Stop and search improvement programme is delivered by NPIA and ACPO to all remaining forces•Effectiveness data are published along disprop. data↓ →

•monitoring progress and publicising outcomes with key agencies and general public

•Publication of revised Stop and Think setting out achievements and short term expectations

↓ →

•0.5FT staff to monitor progress, 0.1 L5 oversight (Q1-Q4)•Regular press releases and briefings• small team (4x0.3 Q3) for preparation and publication

↓

1 yearIndications of impact of adapted S&S policies by 5 police forces on Black , Asian and overall local populations’ sense of fairness and trust

→

•5 police forces’ achieve lowest average of their family (baseline MoJ 2010)or have increased S&S effectiveness (higher conviction rate and crime reduction) •Evaluation and Input of promising local approaches in Next Steps programme

→

•Senior leaders of 5 forces owe S&S change, publicise and communicate changes locally and with NPIA, ACPO and HO•Identification of promising approaches•HO secures long term budget for Next steps change programme

→

•monitoring progress and publicising outcomes with key agencies and general public•Develop contacts with Next steps programme•Lobby for long term provision of Next steps with HO and ministers

→

•0.5FT staff to monitor progress, 0.1 L5 oversight (Q1-Q4)•Regular press releases and briefings• SMT/involvement for lobby work3 Q3) for preparation and publication

Turning assumptions into verifiable hypotheses

The influence of research

• At the level of input– Data analysis– Critical framing of the issues– Theorisation – different angles

• At the level of application– Provided critical summary of insights– Provided technical expertise– Provided consultancy

• At the level of follow up– Link between institutional change and societal impact– What is missing?; scrutiny role, evaluation

Points for discussion- Research

• Situate your research – socially, economically, institutionally, ...

• Think through the difference your research can make

• Sharpen your research questions• Spell out what your ambitions are in

terms of impact – don’t be shy • Avoid turning this into a bureaucratic

exercise at all cost

Points for discussion - Management

• Outreach too often a limited after thought

• Provide examples of where the research group made a difference, why and how

• Build consultation with potential users into resourcing and timing

• Explore options for follow through early on