NHS Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES) and NHS Workforce Disability Equality Standard (WDES) Data Reports

Meeting: Trust Board – Public Meeting

Date: 08.05.2024

Report Title: NHS Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES) and NHS Workforce Disability Equality Standard (WDES) Data Reports

Agenda Item: PUB24/05/5.2

Authors: Amanda Marsh and Tiffani Galicza – EDI Advisors

Lead Director: Dr Hein Scheffer – Director of Strategy, Culture and Education

Purpose: Information noting

Assurance: Reasonable

Link to strategic risk(s):

• SR1a: If we do not ensure our people are safe and their wellbeing prioritised, there is a risk that we will be unable to attract, retain and keep all our people safe and well
• SR1b: If we do not ensure our leaders are developed and equipped, there is a risk that we will not be able to change our culture, and value, support, develop and grow our people
• SR5: If we do not clearly define our strategic plans, we will not have the agility to deliver the suite of improvements needed
• SR6: If we do not deliver sustainable regulatory compliance and develop positive relationships, we will have limited ability to deliver our strategy

Link to Strategic Objective(s):

• Be an exceptional place to work, volunteer and learn
• Provide outstanding quality of care and performance
• Be excellent collaborators and innovators as system partners
• Be an environmentally and financially sustainable organisation

Link to CQC domain:

• Caring
• Well-led

Equality impact assessment: Negative impact identified:

• Disability
• Race

Recommendation: It is recommended that the Trust Board notes the data within the 2023-24 WDES and WRES workforce reports. The data will be uploaded onto the NHS England Data Collection Framework.

Previously considered by: Strategy Culture and Education Group (SCE): 02 May 2024; ELT: 07 May 2024; To be presented to People Committee: 15 May 2024

Purpose: To ensure that the Trust is compliant with the WRES and WDES Standards which support EEAST in meeting its Public Sector General and Specific Equality Duty. This also forms part of the funding agreement with NHS England. The report also highlights the areas where the Trust has demonstrated improvements and reductions in performance, as highlighted in Appendix 1.

Executive Summary:

The data is presented for information only. EEAST is required to meet the deadlines set by NHS Egland as follows:

1. Upload the workforce data for the relevant WDES and WRES metrics and indicators by 31 May 2024 (to the NHS Data Collection Framework).
2. Review the WDES and WRES data and closedown the 2023-24 action plans. Data for this task was sourced from ESR, TRAC and the relevant sections of the NHS Staff Survey 2023.

Please see separate reports in the following Appendices:

• Appendix 1 – WRES and WDES Headlines
• Appendix 2 – WDES Data Report
• Appendix 3 – WRES Data Report

Introduction / Background:

This report provides the Trust with quantitative and qualitative data detailing the differences between disabled and non-disabled staff and BME and White Staff for the previous and current reporting year.

The Trust commissioned McKenzie LLP to carry out further independent surveys with BME and Disabled staff to capture the experience of employees working for EEAST.

These results and data are collected from ESR, TRAC and NHS staff surveys and provided to the EDI team by the People Services Informatics team. The data was analysed, resulting in identifying five key areas for both the WRES and WDES to focus on through the development of objectives for the 2023-24 WDES and WRES action plans.

Throughout the reporting year, progress against these objectives was monitored and the action plans updated accordingly.

On receipt of the workforce data, as of 31 March 2024, the action plans were closed down after analysing the workforce data, documenting where our targets of improvement had been met and not met. This analysis also captured the objectives that had been completed in the reporting year.

Analysis of the data is presented in Appendices 2 and 3 (WDES and WRES data reports) which set out EEAST’s current position compared to 2022-23 data.

Appendix 1. highlights the key areas of improvement and those that have shown a reduction in performance.

It is important to note that some areas have shown improvement that cannot be attributed to the objectives of the action plan.

Key Issues / Risks:

Compliance Issues and Risks

Uploading of the WDES and WRES data is a legal requirement for all NHS funded organisations to comply with by 31 May 2024. Failing to comply will result in a serious breach of the standard and funding agreement with NHS England. As non-compliance of these deadlines is reported, there is a potential impact on EEAST’s credibility across ICS’s and ICB’s and nationally if we fail to meet these.

Data Analysis Issues and Risks

Within the WDES and WRES data reports (Appendices 2 and 3), there are tables demonstrating the % change for each of the metrics and indicators. The reports show the degree of improvements against the metrics and indicators. In some areas the % change has been relatively significant and in others, this change has been very small. The analysis in the reports also shows areas of poorer performance where the experiences of staff have deteriorated.

Options

The data is presented to the Public Board for information only.

Summary:

Next steps

The EDI team will complete the data upload requirement. The next stage will be to develop the WDES and WRES 2024-25 action plans as a result of the data,received in order to improve staff experience. These draft action plans will be shared with the DSN and BME networks to obtain feedback before finalisation. Once finalised and approved, the actions will be incorporated into the EDI Inclusivity Plan.

Appendix 1: WRES and WDES headlines (2023/2024)

WRES two years in review

Where did we improve most in 2023/24?

Where did we see least improvement?  

Where did we improve most in 2022/23

Where did we see a reduction in performance?

WDES two years in review

Where did we improve most in 2023/24?

Where did we see a reduction in performance?

Where did we improve most in 2022/23?

Where did we see a reduction in performance?

Appendix 2: NHS WORKFORCE DISABILITY EQUALITY STANDARD (WDES)

Date of report: month/year: April 2024

Name and title of Board lead for the Workforce Disability Equality Standard: Dr Hein Scheffer Director of Strategy, Culture & Education

Name and contact details of lead manager compiling this report: Tiffani Galicza EDI Advisor

1. Background narrative

a. Any issues of completeness of data.

The main issue identified in completing the data analyses and report was the short timescale given by NHSE. The timescales are challenging to produce and populate reports which need to be approved by the relevant committees. We have also not received the Technical Guidance or Resources as set out in correspondence in February 2024.

b. Any matters relating to reliability of comparisons with previous years.

Compared to last year, there are several areas that have progressed upwards or declined downwards. These have been reflected in the update report, whilst the key headlines are captured in Appendix 1.

c. Headlines from the WDES report for 2023/2024

See Appendix 1.

2. Total numbers of staff (as at 31st March 2024)

a. Employed within this organisation at the date of the report.

6385

b. Proportion of Disabled staff employed within this organisation at the date of the report.

455 Employees – 7.12% of EEAST workforce have shared their disability status.

c. Have any steps been taken in the last reporting period to improve the level of self-reporting Disability?

As of March 2024, 24.94% (1591) of staff have not yet declared their disability. This has slightly reduced from 30.13% (1770) The Trust continues to promote and encourage all of our people to update their ESR with their disability data and a working group has been set up to focus on improving ESR updates and overall reporting.

d. Are any steps planned during the current reporting period to improve the level of self-reporting disability?

A working group has been set up this year to focus on improving ESR updates and overall reporting and to develop guidance on how to do so.

3. Workforce data

a. What period does the organisation’s workforce data refer to?

The reporting is in line with regulatory requires, for 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024.

4.Workforce Disability Equality Metrics

The WDES is a collection of 10 metrics that aim to compare the workplace and career experiences of disabled and non-disabled staff and shows percentages of increase and decrease compared with previous years.

Metric 1. Percentage of staff in each of the AfC Bands 1-9 and VSM (including executive Board members) compared with the percentage of staff in the overall workforce.

Overall Figures:

Overall Figures for Previous Year:

Metric 2: Relative likelihood of non-disabled candidates being appointed from shortlisting compared to disabled candidates.

Relative likelihood of shortlisted to appointment

• Disabled: 0.23
• Non-Disabled: 0.24

Relative likelihood of Non disabled candidates being appointed from shortlisting compared to Disabled candidates: 1.04 times greater

Relative likelihood of shortlisted to appointment

• Disabled: 0.21
• Non-Disabled: 0.21

Relative likelihood of Non disabled candidates being appointed from shortlisting compared to Disabled candidates: 0.98 times greater

We are increasing the number of trained Cultural Inclusion Ambassadors at the Trust and Cohorts underwent training in 2023 and January 2024. A further course is scheduled for April and more CIA’S are being recruited during 2024. Part of their role will be to participate in recruitment panels.

Metric 3. Relative likelihood of disabled staff compared to non-disabled staff entering the formal capability process.

Likelihood of Disabled staff entering the capability process: 0.009890

Likelihood of non-disabled staff entering the capability process: 0.002420

Relative Likelihood of Disabled staff entering the capability process compared to non-disabled staff: 4.09

Likelihood of Disabled staff entering the capability process: 0.011494

Likelihood of non-disabled staff entering the capability process: 0.001864

Relative Likelihood of Disabled staff entering the capability process compared to non-disabled staff: 17

The introduction of Cultural Ambassadors at EEAST, a review and amendment of the Trust’s disciplinary process, has introduced a pause and review step (also known as a pre-action-review-meeting (pre-arm), rather than moving straight to the formal process.

Metric 4a. Percentage of disabled staff compared to non-disabled staff experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse from (i patients, ii managers or iii other colleagues). In the last 12 months.

Metric 4b. Percentage of disabled staff compared to non-disabled saying that the last time they experienced harassment, bullying or abuse at work, they or a colleague reported it.

• Sept 22 Disabled: 49.9%
• Sept 23 Disabled: 48.5%

There has been a slight decrease in disabled staff reporting bullying, harassment, and abuse. However, the FTSU team developed an annual engagement plan to promote the team and explain how to raise a concern. FTSU Guardians are assigned to each of our Equality networks and visit Ambulance Stations to be available to staff. An Executive communication regarding FTSU runs twice a month and the FTSU Guardian Lead attends the quarterly EDI Group meetings to provide updates and emerging themes.

Metric 5. Percentage of disabled staff compared to non-disabled staff believing that the Trust provides equal opportunities for career progression or promotion. Reduce inequality in career progress opportunities.

• Sept 22 Disabled: 32.3%
• Sept 23 Disabled: 42.0%

We have continued to actively promote development programmes and courses widely through our internal communications platform and directly through our Disability Support Network to try and encourage participation and raise awareness e.g., 13+ delegates attended the Calibre Programme, there have been discussion about introducing interview questions to candidates ahead of interviews.

See Metric 4b for FTSU activities.

Metric 6. Percentage of disabled staff compared to non-disabled staff saying that they have felt pressure from their manager to come to work, despite not feeling well enough to perform their duties.

• September 2022

  • Disabled: 42.3%
  • Non-disabled: 31.7%

• September 2023

  • Disabled: 40.2%
  • Non-disabled: 27.2%

Metric 7. Percentage of disabled staff compared to non-disabled staff saying that they are satisfied with the extent to which their organisation values their work.

• September 2022

  • Disabled: 18.3%
  • Non-disabled: 22.7%

• September 2023

  • Disabled: 23.7%
  • Non-disabled: 28.2%

Metric 8. Percentage of disabled staff saying that their employer has made adequate adjustment(s) to enable them to carry out their work.

• 2022: 59.5%
• 2023: 67.4%

Over the last year a Task and Finish group was established to improve this area and to put forward recommendations after surveying staff and obtaining feedback about their experiences. A new reasonable adjustment officer has been appointed within EEAST and will support further improvements.

Metric 9a: The staff engagement score for disabled Staff, compared to non-disabled staff.

The overall engagement score for the organisation is 5.8%.

• September 2022

  • Disabled: 5.1%
  • Non-disabled: 5.6%

• September 2023

  • Disabled: 5.5%
  • Non-disabled: 6%

Metric 9b: Has your Trust taken action to facilitate the voices of disabled staff in your organisation to be heard?
Yes. Some examples include:

• Continuation of EEAST Disability Support Network.
• Active members of National Ambulance Disability network
• McKinsey survey commissioned last year and being repeated during 2024.
• EEAST Strategy consultation /Quarterly pulse surveys/ Exec Q&A
• Individual stories shared on EAST 24 from DSN members for Disability History month.
• 1st Ambulance trust to achieve the Bronze Dyslexia friendly quality mark.
• DSN presented paper at People Committee raising any concerns challenges at Exec level.
• EDS22 consultation (staff element). ** Metric 10: Percentage difference between the organisation’s Board voting membership and its organisation’s overall workforce, disaggregated:** i. By voting membership of the Board. ii. By Executive membership of the Board.

The trust regularly promotes the importance of staff updating their disability information on ESR.

Appendix 3: NHS Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES)

Date of report: (month/year): April 2024

Name and title of Board lead for the Workforce Disability Equality Standard: Dr Hein Scheffer Director of Strategy, Culture & Education

Name and contact details of lead manager compiling this report: Amanda Marsh EDI Manager/Lead

1. Background narrative

a. Any issues of completeness of data.

The main issue identified in completing the data analyses and report was the short timescale by NHSE. The timescales are challenging to produce and populate reports which need to be approved by the relevant committees. We have also not received the Technical Guidance or Resources as set out in correspondence in February 2024.

b. Any matters relating to reliability of comparisons with previous years.

Compared to last year, there are three specific areas that have significantly progressed upwards. The overall results are reflected in the update report, whilst the key headlines are captured in the table below.

c. Headlines from the WRES report for 2023/2024 (Table below).

The three most improved and the three most declined indicators for the last year. We have also observed a disparity between Indicator 4: Likelihood of white staff accessing non-mandatory training and CPD compared to BME staff is 0.97 times greater. Very slight decrease on 2022/23.** And Indicator 7:** Percentage of staff believing the Trust provides equal opportunities for career progression or promotion, significantly increased from 30.6%to 45.4% for BME staff.

*No KPI’s were set for these indicators

2. Total numbers of staff (as of 31st March 2024)

a. Employed within this organisation at the date of the report. 6385

b. Proportion of BME staff employed within this organisation at the date of the report. 5.42

c. Have any steps been taken in the last reporting period to improve the level of self-reporting by ethnicity? As at March 2024, 10.05% (642) of staff have not declared their ethnicity. This is a slight reduction on last year when 12.21% (717) of staff had not declared their ethnicity. The Trust continues to promote and encourage all our people to update their ESR with their ethnicity data.

d. Are any steps planned during the current reporting period to improve the level of self-reporting by ethnicity? The importance of accurate reporting on ethnicity through self-reporting continues to be promoted by the Trust six staff networks. A working group has been set up to focus on improving ESR updates and overall reporting and to develop guidance on how to do so.

a. What period does the organisation’s workforce data refer to? The reporting is in line with regulatory requires, for 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024.

3. Workforce Data

4. Workforce Race Equality Indicators

The WRES is a collection of 9 metrics that aim to compare the workplace and career experiences of BME staff and shows percentages of increase and decrease is compared with previous years. In a large organisation like EEAST, a tiny increase in percentage relating to a certain metric may present challenges in the justification as the impact may be small. However, any change in data supports the Trust in ensuring it continues to work on those metrics to bring out positive change.

Indicator 1. % of staff in each of the AfC Bands 1-9 and VSM (including executive Board members) compared with the % of staff in the overall workforce. Organisations should undertake this calculation separately for non-clinical and for clinical staff.

Overall figures:

Overall figures for previous year:

Figures for each band:

Indicator 2. Relative likelihood of white applicants being appointed from shortlisting compared to BME applicants across all posts.

Relative likelihood of shortlisted to appointment:

• White 0.25
• BME 0.16

Relative likelihood of white candidates being appointed from shortlisting compared to BME. 1.58 times greater

Relative likelihood of shortlisted to appointment:

• White 0.24
• BME 0.11

Relative likelihood of white candidates being appointed from shortlisting compared to BME. 2.26 times greater

Whilst the likelihood of white candidates being appointed from shorting compared to BME candidates in the last year is still higher this has reduced slightly over the last reporting year.

We are increasing the number of trained Cultural Inclusion Ambassador’s at the Trust and Cohorts underwent training in 2023 and January 2024. A further course is scheduled for April and more CIA’S are being recruited during 2024. Part of their role will be to participate in recruitment panels.

We are also looking at more targeted recruitment activities, especially in the most diverse sectors, to increase the diversity of applicants in the first instance, whilst international recruitment from Africa and Southeast Asia should also help in this regard. A Community Engagement Officer in the EDI team has now been appointed.

Indicator 3. Relative likelihood of BME staff entering the formal disciplinary process, as measured by entry into a formal disciplinary investigation, compared to white staff.

Relative likelihood of staff entering formal disciplinary processes.

• White 0.03
• BME 0.01

The relative likelihood of BME staff entering formal disciplinary process compared to white staff. 0.41

Likelihood of staff entering formal disciplinary processes.

• White 0.03
• BME 0.01

The relative likelihood of BME staff entering formal disciplinary process compared to white staff. 0.97

The introduction and deployment of Cultural Inclusion Ambassadors at EEAST, a review and amendment of the Trust’s disciplinary process, has introduced a pause and review step (also known as a pre-action-review-meeting (pre-arm), rather than moving straight to the formal process.

Indicator 4. Relative likelihood of white staff accessing non- mandatory training and CPD compared to BME staff.

2023/2024 Likelihood of staff accessing non-mandatory training & CPD:

• White 0.22
• BME 0.22

Relative likelihood of white staff accessing non- mandatory training and CPD compared to BME staff 0.97 times greater

2022/2023 Likelihood of staff accessing non-mandatory training & CPD:

• White 0.29
• BME 0.25

Relative likelihood of white staff accessing non- mandatory training and CPD compared to BME staff 1.15 times greater

Indicator 5. Percentage of staff experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse from patients, relatives, or the public in the last 12 months.

Indicator 6. Percentage of staff experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse from staff in the last 12 months.

The FTSU team developed an annual engagement plan to promote the team and explain how to raise a concern. FTSU Guardians are assigned to each of our Equality networks and visit Ambulance Stations to be available to staff. An Executive communication regarding FTSU runs twice a month and the FTSU Guardian Lead attends the quarterly EDI Group meetings to provide updates and emerging themes.

Indicator 7. Percentage of staff believing that their Trust provides equal opportunities for career progression or promotion.

Indicator 8. Percentage of staff personally experiencing discrimination at work in the last 12 months from any of the following: Manager/team leader or other colleagues.

The Trust continues to promote its Speak Up, Speak Out, Stop it campaign and promotes its dedicated FTSU team. FTSU Guardians are assigned to each of our Equality networks and visit Ambulance Stations to be available to staff. An Executive communication regarding FTSU runs twice a month.

Indicator 9. Ethnicity profile of the Board. Percentage difference between (i) the organisation’s Board voting membership and its overall workforce (ii) the organisation’s Board executive membership and its overall workforce.

It is noted that Voting numbers have increased from 9 to 11, but only report 1 BME Board member the Exec has increased from 9 to 11 but report 0 BME, Non-Exec shows a slight increase from 2 to 3.