The NHS Equality Delivery System 2 (EDS2)

NHS North, Central and South ManchesterClinical Commissioning Groups

Facilitators: • Hilda Bertie, Equality and Diversity Manager, North West Commissioning Support Unit • Val Bayliss-Brideaux , Senior Engagement, NHS North, Central and South Manchester

Clinical Commissioning Groups

ObjectivesAt the end of this briefing you will have a better understanding of: • The Equality Act 2010• Public Sector Equality Duty • Equality Delivery System 2 • How to grade• Your role in this process

Equality Act 2010

• Replaces previous Equality Legislation• Introduces a new Public Sector Equality Duty • General and Specific Duties

General and Specific Duties

General Duty – all public sector bodies must show “due regard” to the needs of people from the 9

protected characteristics

Specific Duty – some public bodies have to prepare an annual public statement about Equality, Diversity and

Human Rights, as it applies to their services and workforce

Whose included? Protected Characteristics

Important Communities of Interest People who are:•Carers•Homeless•Living in poverty•Long-term unemployed•In stigmatised occupations (such as women and men involved in prostitution)•Misusing drugs•Isolated and have limited access to family or social networks•Who are geographically isolated• Military Veterans

What is the Equality Delivery System 2?Making sure that we commission services as fairly as possible, to ensure that the health and access

needs of all communities are met• Performance Management Tool to assess Equality, Diversity and Human Rights across NHS organisations• A way of reviewing services and working practices• Supports keeping Equality and Diversity high on the agenda• 4 overarching Goals• 18 Outcomes

4 GoalsThe are 4 goals:

Goal 1 – Better health outcomes

Goal 2 – Improved patient access and experience

Goal 3 – A representative and supported workforce

Goal 4 – Inclusive leadership

18 OutcomesEach outcome supports one of the 4 goals

Each goal is spilt into a number of “outcomes” e.g. Goal 4 is spilt into two outcomes

Each “outcome” is graded, based on evidence and case studies

An overall grade is given for each goal

Our journey so far…• Established a group of managers to support this

process (Task and Finish Group)• Gathered evidence and case studies across the 4

goals and 18 outcomes• An internal self-assessment is taking place – to

demonstrate the grades that we think we are at

EDS2 Goal insert goal number & title EDS2 Outcome insert outcome number

CCG NAME: Description of outcome: See page 7 & 8 of guidance Lead contacts: Evidence for annual public grading is shown below and relates to CCG evidence from: insert dates Grading Underdeveloped Developing Achieving Excelling

People from all protected groups fare poorly compared with people overall OR evidence is not available

People from only some protected groups fare as well as people overall

People from most protected groups fare as well as people overall

People from all protected groups fare as well as people overall

EDS2 Grade

Insert at internal assessment

Reasons for rating

Outcome: The service(s) this evidence relates to: Engagement with local protected groups: (include any priority findings and outcomes) Engagement with local health Inclusion Groups: (include any priority findings and outcomes) Your approach to CCG recognising and addressing health inequalities for these vulnerable groups Mainstream processes: Equality Analysis: Scrutiny for any adverse impacts - how is this embedded into commissioning practices? Progression plans: Disadvantaged groups: Evidence: Mainstream processes and summary of activities.

EDS2 stakeholder training event held: 7th October 2014

Grading by local interest groups completed: 4th November 2014

Findings by local communities of interest: This section to be completed after the external stakeholder grading.

Overall grading is:

Equality Delivery System – Case Study TemplateEDS 2 GOAL (S):

OUTCOME Number(s): Case Study Title: Service: Case study overview Please provide a short summary of the work being described in the case study.

Please identify what protected characteristics this case study relates to?

The Key Issue(s) What are the main issues that lead the project/pilot/work to take place?

How we responded What action took place in response to the issue(s)?Who was involved?How was it resourced?

What engagement took place? Who did you engage with, identify which protected groups?How and where did engagement take place?How did this help your project/pilot/work? – What feedback was gained from the engagement?

What difference has it made? What was the impact made because of this work?How has it made a positive difference to local patient’s lives?What would have happened if the work hadn’t taken place?

Additional Information Please add any additional information that you think would be relevant and useful to include in the context of supporting your case study.

Contact Please insert main contacts – name, job title, email, contact telephone number, service area and location

Internal self-assessment

A group of Managers will meet and decide on the grading for each Outcome and Goal.

These grading's will be open for discussion at the external grading session on 4th November 2014.

How you can support and work with us• Using your experience and knowledge, tell us how

we’re doing in relation to protected groups• Grade us from red/amber/green/purple• The grade you give us will be made public• It’s your grade that counts• Tell us what we still need to do

Your involvement and what is expected

•Read evidence and case studies on our progress•Evidence will be presented in various formats•Grade each outcome •If you disagree with our grading, we want your views as to why

Your grading and what we would like you to consider

•Have we shown that we have thought about all the protected characteristics in Goals 1 and 2? •In Goal 3 have we shown that our staff feel empowered, engaged and well supported across the protected characteristics?•In Goal 4 have we shown how our leaders know their responsibilities and have taken Equality and diversity into account when making decisions?•If not, have we shown that we have plans to improve?

What does each grade mean?

Excelling – PurpleAchieving – GreenDeveloping – AmberUndeveloped – Red

How do you decide which grade to give usWe need you to consider the following question:

How well do people from protected groups fare compared with people overall?

Your grade will depend on the outcome of the above:

•Underdeveloped – majority of evidence for 2 or less protected groups fare well•Developing – majority of people in 3 to 5 protected groups fare well•Achieving – majority of people in 6 – 8 protected groups fare well•Excelling – majority in all 9 protected groups fare well

And finally…

This is your opportunity to share with us any questions and queries.

Are you still interested in taking part in the external stakeholder assessment on the 4th November?

Refreshments and lunch will be available on the 4th, so please inform us of any specific dietary needs.

Thank You