The Public Sector Equality Duty: Making a difference topeople’s lives

Kate Clayton-HathwayOxford Brookes Centre for Diversity Policy Research and Practice

kclayton-hathway@brookes.ac.uk

Background to study

• Meta-review of evidence for PSED showed having a positive impact but lack of ‘on the ground’ evidence

• Existing research on lone mothers about them as a ‘social problem’ - not their voices as service users

• Bristol City as case study area

Single mothers in context

•‘Protected characteristics’ - sex, maternity and pregnancy

•91% of UK lone parents are women and face disproportionate poverty

•75.5% of children in poverty in Bristol live in lone parent families (compared with 68.2% in England)

•Over half of Bristol children in poverty live in households where the youngest child is under five

Stakeholder input

• Understand services available and issues

• Ten interviewed including local authority, children’s centres (public and private), campaigning organisations and community workers

“…no doubt the original council equality forums [such as Bristol Women’s Voice] were set up to deliver the requirements of the duty … As you know public sector organisations are no longer required to produce gender equality schemes … However the

duty is useful for reminding the council about EqIAs and protected characteristics”

Committee Member, Bristol Women’s Commission

Stakeholder input

“So the decision to reduce the [equalities] team wasn’t my decision … a lot of that was driven by a ‘statutory minimum’ exercise where we said ‘what is it we need to do to deliver our statutory duties’?”

Local Authority Equalities Specialist

“The culture has changed at the Local Authority and the focus is now on financial outcomes. There has been a real move away from the Equality Act – nobody talks about it any more and it is seen as a ‘burden’”

Front-line Community Worker and Trainer (and former LA employee)

Service user input

• Five ‘initial’ chats (some group) and 14 1:1 interviews

• Lone mothers more intensive users of public services due to pregnancy, maternity and caring responsibilities

• Recruitment included leaflets, posters, community e-newsletters, websites for lone parents, community meetings; Twitter, Facebook, word-of-mouth, front-line stakeholders

• Identifying participants the biggest challenge so far

• Ages from 26-45; one child to six children; Children 16 weeks – 20+ years

Service user experiences

•Isolation: “social situations get harder” and difficult keeping up with existing friends or making new ones

•Over-reliance on the internet and social media for social interaction and information

•Insecure housing – inappropriate accommodation, away from friends and family or over-reliant on friends and family

•Mental health issues – depression, breakdown, need of emotional support

Service user experiences

• Services can be directly attributed to the PSED

• Cuts starting to bite – maternity grants, less childcare investment and provision, increases in childcare provision and leisure activity costs

• Significant difference between having one or more children, and the implications for service use

• Stigma – lengths will go to, ‘to keep it all together’ and the implications for access to services (eg, a preference for meeting with other single mums who won’t judge)

Service users – networks for coping

“I haven’t relied on people too much to help me, I can’t really. I think I’ve tried to do a lot myself, if anyone lets you down it’s not such a problem. It’s quite difficult sometimes, all my family and parents live [in another town, about 1.5 hrs away]. If I’m sick, my friend around the corner can take my son to school, if I’m really ill. ”

B, Single Mother, 30s, one son (7 years)

Case Study – Parks and recreation

Parks and recreation – adverse impacts?

Parks and recreation - outcomes

Parks and recreation

“‘Playing out’ works well – where they close the street off, you sit with a cuppa and chat and take turns to guard the end of the road. The park is so depressing, you sit on your own. As a single working mum you don’t get a chance to make those friendships – they all bring friends already and go off for tea…”

Z, Single Mother, 40s, 2 children 12 and 18 years, BS3

Parks and recreation

“It’s a struggle to find things that the children can do together … my daughter can do soft play so we can go to Hengrove Park where there is a coffee place to play after school in the summer.”

Z, Single Mother, 30s, 2 children a 14-year-old girl with a severe learning disability and a boy of 8 years, BS4

Parks and recreation

“Redcatch [park] is not gated except for one part which is not a big space … not much there and my daughter can get bored … at Hengrove there’s a lot more for both children to do – big and small stuff, sand and water”

K, Single Mother, 30s, 2 children a 14-year-old girl with a severe learning disability and a boy of 8 years, BS4

Case Study – Review of Children’s Centres

Review of Children’s Centres - evidence

Review of Children’s Centres - evidence

Children’s centres - support

“The [Children’s Centre] staff were really good when my partner left me when I was six months’ pregnant … taking me different places for different things like help with benefits, they really gave me advice and support. I think they’re fantastic, from personal experience.”

B, Single Mother, 30s, two daughters (16 weeks and 2 years), BS4

Children’s centres - support

“They [at the Children’s Centre] do a lot, the staff work really hard there. They helped me a lot [with study support, getting into work, parenting classes, cooking], but I can see a lot of other families are benefitting as well. They had dad’s groups, and different groups for different things, designed for speech, bonding, and things like that”

S, Single Mother, 20s, one son (4.5 years), psychology student, BS4

Single mothers as a ‘hard to reach’ group

• Exclusion of ‘hard to reach’ individuals (language barriers; lack of confidence; time and cash poor)

• Working via social media, eg, setting up interviews and informing participants via Facebook or Twitter

• Ethics: vulnerability - some were going through break-ups and custody battles now; coercion – being ‘encouraged’ to take part by support workers, etc.

• Logistics – fitting discussions in around childcare and children, and very busy lives

Further discussion points…

• What are the benefits in ‘going the extra mile’ to connect with hard-to-reach groups?

• How can small-scale, qualitative work be used to provide richer data for EqIAs (enabling focused services)?

• Whose ‘voice’ is represented with consultation exercises?

ReferencesBristol City Council (2012). Bristol Child Poverty Strategy, http://bristolchildren.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/child-povery-strategy-2011-20.pdf [Accessed 15/6/2013].

Bristol City Council (2013). Review of Children’s Centres and Early Years Support - Bristol City Council Equality Impact Assessment Form https://www.bristol.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/council_and_democracy/R-PP-003%20Children%27s%20Centres%20and%20Early%20Years_0_0.pdf [Accessed 30/4/2015].

Bristol City Council (2014). Estates Playgrounds Hengrove (29/01/14) Bristol City Council Equality Impact Assessment Form http://www.bristol.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/council_and_democracy/R-PL-010%20Estates%20Playgrounds%20Hengrove%20Update%20Feb%202014.pdf [Accessed 30/4/2015].

Clayton-Hathway, K. (2013) The Public Sector Equality Duty – Empirical Evidence Base https://www.brookes.ac.uk/services/hr/cdprp/centre_projects/psed_evidence.pdf [Accessed 1/2/2014].

Office for National Statistics, (2014). Statistical Bulletin – Families and Households 2014 – Key Findings, http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_393133.pdf [Accessed 3/4/2015].