Equality impact assessment - LG anti social behaviour

Please tell us what you think about our website, we welcome your feedback.

Customer notice

Due to essential maintenance some of our web services will be unavailable between these times 7pm Friday 25 May and 5pm Sunday 27 May 2012.

1. What is the name of the policy or service that is being assessed?

Anti-social behaviour policies – Community Safety. There are many policies and protocols under this function and we are assessing overall rather selecting them individually.

2. What are the aims of the policy or service? Whose needs is it designed to meet? What are the current priorities?

Overall the policies/guidance aim to provide best practice in terms of managing the ASB process. The policies/information sharing protocols aim to help those partners involved to effectively manage the ASB process and consequently provide an enhanced service to the community including highlighting the issues of the perception of ASB and the necessity of measuring that perception and altering it where necessary and simultaneously reassure the public.

The priorities are to meet the LAA priorities and reassure the public in relation to ASB.

3. In what ways might this policy or service affect some groups of people differently? Might some groups find it harder to access the service? Do some groups have particular needs that are not well met by the current policy or service?

The ASB policies focus on shaping and influencing all agencies involved in the ASB process, particularly drawing their attention to considering the resulting effects of ASB measures that are taken when dealing with ASB. These include for example – section 30 dispersal orders and ASBOS. Research carried out on behalf of this team earlier in 2006 highlighted the negative impact on young people when S30 measures are carried out. The research showed that young people are perceived as the key cause of ASB and consequently the view that all young people cause ASB. As a result this research showed that young people feel that if they are targeted via S30 dispersal methods they feel safer in larger groups, which then perpetrates further the original issue.

The outcome of this particular research can be integrated across the ASB policies and protocols as it highlighted a need for increased substantiating of ASB statistics, to continue the campaign for an understanding of ASB behaviour and what is acceptable and unacceptable, a greater understanding of partner agencies of each other’s work and a greater understanding of the root of the ASB problem. Young people’s opinions were sought during the research which was highlighted in current policies as a key aspect of identifying the problems and the consequent solutions. In addition, residents (including many older members of the community) were interviewed and opinions sought. One area that has been highlighted has been the possible language barriers to ethnic groups when section 30 notices are distributed.

Overall, the practice around dispersal orders could impact on young people as discussed in the evaluation and notably since the evaluation and the highlighting of the issues and effects, no dispersal orders have been requested. It has been recommended that a similar evaluation is carried out around ASBOs as the above research showed that the outcome may also effect young people adversely.

4. What evidence do you have for your judgement? Is there evidence of public concern (e.g. complaints)? Have staff raised concerns? Is there local or national research to suggest that there could be a problem?

The reply in Q3 notes evidence available via the research mentioned. The public view is also reflected via the research as many members of the public voiced their concern that ASB measures reflected badly on all young people as a whole. Other sources of information originate from Tomorrow’s voice and People’s Voice consultations conducted by WCC. This teamhas been told that the Tomorrows/People’s voice surveys are an appropriate mix. However it is unclear if this includes all the 6 equality areas highlighted. This team does regularly question the information around these 6 areas.

5. Who have you consulted with as part of your assessment? What were the results? Have you published the results of that consultation? If so, where?

As above in Q4. The results are published in line with the council policy – normally on the website network. This team makes every effort to involve young people when consulting and in policy making where possible – this has been evidenced for example within the already noted recent evaluation of dispersal orders in Wiltshire where young people were identified as a key part of the process. We also draw on consultation work carried out by Community Planning and in fact contribute to this on a regular basis at workshops. Police neighbourhood teams also provide evidenced consultation that can contribute to the work carried out in this team – for eg around the perception of ASB.

6. If you have found that the policy or service might have an adverse impact on a particular group of people, can you justify this?

This team believes that it is trying to reduce/minimise any adverse impact and consequently reduce fear, reduce the impact on the public etc. This team feels that they have worked in partnership and have considered these 6 key areas for some time. This is evidenced within the strategies and policies already in place. Where there is possible adverse impact against young people and ASB the work in progress has already been outlined.

7. If the impact cannot be justified, what do you intend to do about this? Are there changes that you could introduce which would make the policy or service work better for this group of people? Is further research or consultation required?

Looking forward: Making sure that consultation carried out takes into account the 6 key areas.

1. By ensuring that service specifications are robust enough
2. By requesting that this area has a higher profile – to the equivalent of Health and Safety
3. Ensuring the involvement of users of services. Working towards ensuring the user groups are represented.
4. By looking at constantly reviewing/challenging, particularly via the team equalities designated person and being prepared to change.
5. Introducing the equality issue as a regular item on the management meeting agendas and being pro-active rather than relying on individuals to take responsibility.

8. How will you monitor the take-up or impact of the policy or service in future?

Considering all 6 areas as a team– the policy is designed to reduce the adverse issues and we will be able to assess the success via the continuous surveys (outlined in previous questions) already in place. We will consider designing a flowchart to look at the KPIs and then consider the other implications and our performance in those 6 areas. This will be considered at our next meeting. We are also able to monitor via the complaints process.

9. What actions do you plan to take as a result of this equality impact assessment? Please state any resource implications

1. Give consideration to setting up specific measures/targets re the above
2. We will introduce the 6 equality areas as a regular item at management meetings
3. We plan to double check service specifications/policies and protocols to ensure they reflect the 6 equality areas sufficiently
4. We have in place our team equality advisor
5. We plan to review equality impact assessments 6 monthly

10. There is a legal requirement to publish the outcomes of Equality Impact Assessments. Please outline how / where this will happen

The assessments will be available under the council policy – most likely on the council website

11. Name of person completing form

-

Date assessment completed

10/10/06

12. Senior manager approval

Assistant Director Community Services

Date

10/10/06

Last updated: 13 May 2009