Charnwood Borough Council Equality Impact Assessment ... · The Corporate Plan 2016-2026 is a...

Charnwood Borough Council

Equality Impact Assessment ‘Knowing the needs of your customers and employees’

Background An Equality Impact Assessment is an improvement tool. It will assist you in ensuring that you have thought about the needs and impacts of your service/policy/function in relation to the protected characteristics. It enables a systematic approach to identifying and recording gaps and actions.

Legislation- Equality Duty As a local authority that provides services to the public, Charnwood Borough Council has a legal responsibility to ensure that we can demonstrate having paid due regard to the need to:

Eliminate discrimination, harassment and victimisation

Advance Equality of Opportunity Foster good relations

For the following protected characteristics: 1. Age 2. Disability 3. Gender reassignment 4. Marriage and civil partnership 5. Pregnancy and maternity 6. Race 7. Religion and belief 8. Sex (Gender) 9. Sexual orientation

What is prohibited? 1. Direct Discrimination 2. Indirect Discrimination 3. Harassment 4. Victimisation 5. Discrimination by association 6. Discrimination by perception 7. Pregnancy and maternity discrimination 8. Discrimination arising from disability 9. Failing to make reasonable adjustments

Note: Complete the action plan as you go through the questions

Step 1 – Introductory information

Title of the policy Corporate Plan 2016-2020 (Draft for public consultation).

Name of lead officer and others undertaking this assessment

Helen Gretton Suzanne Kinder

Date EIA started October 2016

Date EIA completed December 2016

Step 2 – Overview of policy/function being assessed:

Outline: What is the purpose of this policy? (Specify aims and objectives)

The Corporate Plan 2016-2026 is a strategic plan which outlines what Charnwood Borough Council plans to deliver to the community over the next four years. It sets out the activity to be undertaken by the authority, and with partners, and identifies real and achievable targets, which in turn will create positive outcomes for individuals and communities in service design, delivery and employment.

What specific group/s is the policy designed to affect/impact and what is the intended change or outcome for them?

The whole population will be affected. The Corporate Plan 2016-2020 is an overarching document which is designed to create positive impacts for people who live, work and visit in the Borough. It should not have an adverse impact on any groups or individuals as its purpose is to make the Council’s practices and services more effective, fair and accessible for all.

Which groups have been consulted as part of the creation or review of the policy?

A resident’s survey was undertaken for 12 weeks, from July- October 2015. This was an opportunity to consult with residents across all of the protected characteristics throughout the Borough.

Specific consultation was also undertaken with individuals and community groups from each of the protected characteristics. This included face to face consultation with young people, older people and people with disabilities.

Results from other appropriate service specific consultations were also used to influence the content of the Corporate Plan 2016-2020.

Step 3 – What we already know and where there are gaps

List any existing information/data do you have/monitor about different diverse groups in relation to this policy? Such as in relation to age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy & maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, sexual orientation etc.

Data/information such as:

Consultation Previous Equality Impact Assessments Demographic information Anecdotal and other evidence

1. Demographic information (based on Census 2011) which provides information on a range of the

protected characteristics, in particular, age, disability, race, religion or belief, sex.

2. Residents Survey (Summer 2015) which surveyed a cross range of residents across the borough of Charnwood.

3. Residents Survey (Summer 2015) with specific community groups based on the protected characteristics.

4. Various information based on service specific consultations and monitoring of services.

What does this information / data tell you about diverse group? If you do not hold or have access to any data/information on diverse groups, what do you need to begin collating / monitoring? (Please list)

This information and consultation informs the council of the specific needs and priorities of residents and service users, including all diverse groups across the Borough. The development of the Corporate Plan 2016-2020, ensures that the actions and objectives embedded within the plan provide positive outcomes for everyone living, working and visiting the Borough.

A potential barrier is access to and availability of relevant information on sexual orientation and gender reassignment from within the Council and from other organisations. As the Corporate Plan 2016-2020 is an overarching strategic document, this will not create any adverse impacts on any particular diverse group within the community, but when implementing the individual projects and initiatives within the plan it is important to consider collecting information in these areas in order to inform service delivery and to mitigate any potential adverse impact.

Step 4 – Do we need to seek the views of others? If so, who?

In light of the answers you have given in Step 2, do you need to consult with specific groups to identify needs / issues? If not please explain why.

Not in this circumstance. The Corporate Plan 2016-2020 is an overarching strategic plan which includes a number of initiatives and different projects which are designed to provide positive outcomes for the wider community. Further consultation for individual protected characteristics will take place as part of the ongoing development and implementation of these specific projects and initiatives which make up the Corporate Plan 2016-2020.

Step 5 – Assessing the impact

In light of any data/consultation/information and your own knowledge and awareness, please identify whether the policy has a positive or negative impact on the individuals or community groups (including what barriers these individuals or groups may face) who identify with any ‘protected characteristics’ and provide an explanation for your decision (please refer to the general duties on the front page).

Comments

Age

The actions and objectives set out in the Corporate Plan 2016-2020 are likely to have a positive impact on individuals and communities with regards to the protected characteristic of age. Specific initiatives have been included in the Corporate Plan to support vulnerable members of our community, including younger people and older people. This should create a greater positive impact on this protected characteristic.

Disability (Physical, visual, hearing, learning

disabilities, mental health)

The actions and objectives set out in the Corporate Plan 2016-2020 are likely to have a positive impact on individuals and communities with regards to the protected characteristic of disability. Specific initiatives have been included in the Corporate Plan to support vulnerable members of our community, including people with disabilities. This should create a greater positive impact on this protected characteristic. The publication of the Corporate Plan 2016-2020 will be provided in an accessible format if required and requested by specific individuals/ community groups.

Gender Reassignment (Transgender)

The actions and objectives set in the Corporate Plan 2016-2020 are likely to have a positive impact on individuals and communities with regards to the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. A potential barrier may be access to and availability of relevant information as there is little national and local information on gender re-assignment both within the Council and other organisations. Therefore, additional monitoring of this protected characteristic may be required.

Race The actions and objectives set out in the Corporate Plan 2016-2020 are likely to have a positive impact on individuals and communities with regards to the protected characteristic of race. The published Corporate Plan 2016-2020 will be available in alternative languages if required and requested by specific individuals/ community groups.

Religion or Belief (Includes no belief)

The actions and objectives set out in the Corporate Plan 2016-2020 are likely to have a positive impact on individuals and communities with regards to the protected characteristic of religion or belief.

Sex (Gender)

The actions and objectives set out in the Corporate Plan 2016-2020 are likely to have a positive impact on individuals and communities with regards to the protected characteristic of sex.

Sexual Orientation The actions and objectives set out in the Corporate Plan 2016-2020 are likely to have a positive impact on individuals and communities with regards to the protected characteristic of sexual orientation. A potential barrier may be access to and availability of relevant information as there is little national and local information on sexual orientation both within the Council and other organisations. Therefore, additional monitoring of this protected characteristic may be required.

Other protected groups (Pregnancy &

maternity, marriage & civil partnership)

The Corporate Plan 2016-2020 will provide positive impacts for all members of the community and this fully includes individuals within the protected characteristics of pregnancy & maternity and marriage & civil partnership.

Other socially excluded groups (carers, low literacy, priority

neighbourhoods, health inequalities, rural isolation, asylum seeker and refugee

communities etc.)

The actions and objectives within the Corporate Plan 2016- 2020 also cover a variety of other groups such as; rural isolation, deprived or disadvantaged communities (priority neighbourhoods), health inequality, asylum seeker and refugee communities. The specific actions in the Corporate Plan 2016-2020 are likely to have a positive impact on all individuals and communities. The Corporate Plan 2016-2020 aims to create inclusive communities and foster good community relations. Key initiatives are focussed on involving communities, giving them a voice and supporting them to be involved in decision making within their own communities. Therefore there is likely to be a further positive impact on individuals and communities with regards to community involvement and cohesion.

Where there are potential barriers, negative impacts identified and/ or barriers or impacts are unknown, please outline how you propose to minimise all negative impact or discrimination. Please note:

a) If you have identified adverse impact or discrimination that is illegal, you are required to take action to remedy this immediately.

b) Additionally, if you have identified adverse impact that is justifiable or legitimate, you will need to consider what actions can be taken to mitigate its effect on those groups of people.

Further consultation for individual protected characteristics will take place as part of the ongoing development and implementation of these specific projects and initiatives which make up the Corporate Plan 2016-2020.

Summarise your findings and give an overview as to whether the policy will meet Charnwood Borough Council’s responsibilities in relation to equality and diversity (please refer to the general duties on the front page).

The Corporate Plan 2016-2020 aims to provide positive impact for all individuals living, working and vising the Borough and therefore meets the Council’s responsibilities in relation to equality and diversity.

Step 6- Monitoring, evaluation and review

Are there processes in place to review the findings of this Assessment and make appropriate changes? In particular, how will you monitor potential barriers and any positive/ negative impact?

If any negative impacts occur/ potential barriers arise then this will be monitored and evaluated via our Corporate Customer Complaints Procedure. Where appropriate, individual Equality Impact Assessments will be conducted as part of the ongoing development and implementation of specific projects and initiatives which make up the Corporate Plan 2016-2020. This will seek to mitigate any barriers or adverse impact to any of the protected groups.

How will the recommendations of this assessment be built into wider planning and review processes? e.g. policy reviews, annual plans and use of performance management systems.

All actions within the Corporate Plan are monitored through the Annual Business Plan via the Council’s Performance Management System. This is monitored via the Council’s Corporate Management Team, Senior Management Team and Performance Scrutiny Panel and any negative impacts will be picked up through this scrutiny process.

Step 7- Action Plan

Please include any identified concerns/actions/issues in this action plan: The issues identified should inform your Service Plan and, if appropriate, your Consultation Plan

Reference Number

Action

Responsible Officer

Target Date

001

Further consider the protected characteristics of gender reassignment and sexual orientation when developing and implementing specific projects and initiatives within the Corporate Plan 2016-2020.

Heads of Service

in all service areas across Charnwood Borough Council

Ongoing

002

Further consider consultation for individual protected characteristics as part of the ongoing development and implementation of specific projects and initiatives which make up the Corporate Plan 2016-2020.

Heads of Service

in all service areas across Charnwood Borough Council

Ongoing

Step 8- Who needs to know about the outcomes of this assessment and how will they be informed?

Who needs to know (Please tick)

How they will be informed (we have a legal duty to publish EIA’s)

Employees

This EIA will be published on Charnwood Borough Council’s webpage and intranet. Service users, partners and stakeholders can also request this EIA in alternative formats if required.

Service users

Partners and stakeholders

Others

N/A N/A

To ensure ease of access, what other communication needs/concerns are

there?

N/A N/A

Step 9- Conclusion (to be completed and signed by the Service Head)

Please delete as appropriate

I agree / disagree with this assessment / action plan

If disagree, state action/s required, reasons and details of who is to carry them out with timescales:

Signed (Service Head):

Date:

Please send completed & signed assessment to Suzanne Kinder for publishing.

Insight through vision

www.crmr.co.uk

Report on the 2015

Residents Consultation

Prepared by CR Market Research

November 2015


CR Market Research 1 November 2015

Contents

Introduction......................................................................................................................... 2

Key Findings ........................................................................................................................ 3

Project Background ........................................................................................................... 4

Respondent Profile ............................................................................................................. 5

Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 9

Are Charnwood residents happy? .............................................................................. 9

What is important to Charnwood residents? ........................................................... 10

How satisfied are Charnwood residents? ................................................................. 12

Priorities versus Satisfaction ......................................................................................... 13

Overall satisfaction ...................................................................................................... 15

Are Charnwood’s communities cohesive? .............................................................. 16

Finding out about and accessing council services ................................................ 17

What are residents’ channel preferences? ............................................................. 19

Are residents satisfied with their experience when contacting the council? ..... 20

How would residents prefer to hear about services and council tax? ................ 21

Are residents happy with how CBC spends council tax? ...................................... 23

Do residents feel they can influence decision making? ........................................ 24

Do residents feel they can get involved in decision making? .............................. 26

Volunteering ................................................................................................................. 27

Appendix – Questionnaire Completion Rates ............................................................. 28



Introduction

This report presents an analysis of the 2015 edition of the Charnwood Borough

Council Residents Survey. As in our previous exercises, in 2011 and 2013, CR Market

Research is pleased to present our analysis of the information that has been

gathered and hope the insight we have provided will help improve the Council’s

understanding of the current issues affecting residents of the borough.

Although there have been some small changes to the structure of the

questionnaire on this occasion, we have provided comparisons with previous results

where we can. We are delighted to present this analysis and hope that Charnwood

Borough Council will find this report both interesting and informative.

Rose Collin

Sales & Marketing Director

CR Market Research



Key Findings

The overriding message from many of the themes covered in this survey is that

residents appear to be relatively less satisfied than they were two years ago. In

some cases, the changes reported are not significant and simply reflect different

sample groups; on other occasions the changes are statistically significant and will

be areas the Council may want to explore in more detail.

Key findings include:

1. The percentage of residents that say they are ‘very happy’ living in the

borough has fallen from 48% to 34%, and overall happiness levels have

dropped from 94% to 87%.

2. Residents priorities are increasingly concentrating around a small number of

themes, with the top three of safety, cleanliness/tidiness of the local area and

rubbish collection standards all increasing as priorities since 2013. In particular,

‘Cleanliness and tidiness in my local area’ has increased significantly as a

priority, from 30% in 2013 to 49% in 2015

3. Satisfaction with individual themes has improved for only four of the twelve

factors since the last survey. There has been a significant decline in one

particular area – the availability of housing that residents can afford to rent

4. Overall, 82% of residents are satisfied with the way CBC delivers its services

(85% in 2013). Around one in eight residents are ‘very satisfied’. Just more than

15% say they are dissatisfied, compared with 12% in the last survey.

5. There is a weaker sense of community cohesion, with 67% saying they felt their

local area was a place where different backgrounds got on well together.

This represents a statistically significant fall on the 78% reported in 2013.

6. In terms of channel preferences, there is a clear increase in the proportion of

residents that would use the Council’s website (from 22% to 37% in 2015). There

has been a converse, albeit smaller, decrease in those opting for telephone

as a preferred channel.

7. Similarly, there is now a much greater interest in using the website as means

of receiving communication from the Council. Traditional ‘hard copy’ media

such as magazines and posters are less popular, although leaflets remain the

most preferred method.

8. Only 12% of residents feel it is easy to influence local decision making, down

slightly on 2013.

9. Finally, residents were asked if they would be interested in participating in

volunteering activity. Perhaps unsurprisingly, there is more interest in getting

involved in things like customer panels than there is in active volunteering.



Project Background

Charnwood Borough Council commissioned CR Market Research to conduct an

on-line consultation exercise with residents of the borough during the period July to

October 2015. This repeats similar exercises conducted in 2011 and 2013, and we

have provided comparative analysis with previous surveys wherever possible.

As in previous years, the research has a number of key objectives:

To update some of the indicators contained in the 2011 and 2013 Residents

Survey.

To provide insight for the Business Planning process.

To provide resident satisfaction data to senior management and members to

help Charnwood continue to improve service delivery.

The survey consisted of around thirty questions including monitoring details (age,

ethnicity, residence, disability, gender and faith).

A total of 1,078 residents completed the survey in 2015. This compares to 806 in

2013.

We have also gathered the postcode of each respondent. This has been

converted to ward level data and mapped (see page 9). In 2013, we aggregated

the ward level data to Area Forums in order to provide some geographical

breakdown. We understand these Forums no longer exist and that type of analysis

is no longer applicable. We have included one ward-level map, identifying priority

themes for each area, but this needs to be treated with caution due to the sample

sizes involved.

This year, we have also been asked to identify how many respondents participated

from designated priority areas. This is detailed on page 9.



Respondent Profile

In order to set the following results in context, it is important to understand the make-

up of the respondent sample to this survey. This first section provides an overview

of the diversity of the sample obtained, across the standard equalities streams.

Age & Gender Age Female Male Prefer not to say Total

15 and under 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 44 4.1% 45 4.2%

16-18 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.1%

20-29 6 0.6% 10 0.9% 0 0.0% 16 1.5%

30-39 53 4.9% 24 2.2% 0 0.0% 77 7.1%

40-49 79 7.3% 49 4.5% 4 0.4% 132 12.2%

50-59 91 8.4% 67 6.2% 1 0.1% 159 14.7%

60-69 127 11.8% 103 9.6% 1 0.1% 231 21.4%

70-79 118 10.9% 147 13.6% 1 0.1% 266 24.7%

80+ 35 3.2% 59 5.5% 1 0.1% 95 8.8%

Prefer not to say 8 0.7% 4 0.4% 44 4.1% 56 5.2%

Grand Total 518 48.1% 464 43.0% 96 8.9% 1,078 100.0%

Ethnicity White British 889 82.5%

White Irish 10 0.9%

Other White 34 3.2%

Multiple heritage black African and White 2 0.5%

Multiple heritage Asian and White 1 0.1%

Multiple heritage black Caribbean and White 3

Mixed Other 0 0.0%

Black British 0 0.0%

Other Black background 0 0.0%

Asian or Asian British Indian 15 1.4%

Asian or Asian British other 3 0.3%

Chinese 0 0.0%

Gypsy/Romany/Irish Traveller 1 0.1%

Other ethnic group 0 0.0%

Prefer not to say 120 11.1%

Total 1,078 100.0%



Religion Christian 570 52.9%

Hindu 15 1.4%

Muslim 1 0.1%

Sikh 0 0.0%

Buddhism 6 0.6%

Other 28 2.6%

No religious belief 291 27.0%


Total 1,078 100.0%

Disability (respondents could tick more than one category) None 784 72.7%

Learning disability 2 0.2%

Sensory impairment 27 2.5%

Longstanding health problem 67 6.2%

Mental health problem 14 1.3%

Physical disability 74 6.9%

Other 20 1.9%


Sexual Orientation Heterosexual/Straight 833 77.3%

Bisexual 16 1.5%

Gay 8 0.7%

Lesbian 4 0.4%


Total 1,078 100.0%



Wards

We can also note the geographical distribution of respondents. Using the postcode provided by the respondent, we have

generated totals for each of the 28 wards in the borough. All have at least one respondent, although the volumes involved do

not permit us to generate robust analysis at this level of detail. The table below provides Ward figures and the map illustrates the

distribution of all respondents across the borough.



Priority Areas

Following the update in 2010 of the Indices of

Multiple Deprivation Charnwood’s five Priority

Neighbourhoods were confirmed. These

Neighbourhoods are predominately in areas

of social housing where income deprivation is

significant and crime and ASB are often

common occurrences. The residents of these

areas are often disengaged from regular

statutory services and are often reluctant to

participate in consultations and feedback.

The Council has helped to build improved

community engagement and has seen an

increase in contact particularly through the

Community Hubs and resident groups.

Officers have encouraged people to have

their say and have supported the various

consultations where possible.

A total of 170 respondents that reside in these

Priority Neighbourhoods participated in the

survey, representing 16% of all respondents.



Analysis

This main section of the report provides an overview of the survey results and

identifies some key messages for Charnwood Borough Council to consider.

Are Charnwood residents happy?

Respondents were asked how happy they were living in their local area. Figure 1

presents overall happiness figures for the borough as a whole.

Figure 1

Nearly nine in ten respondents (87%) regard themselves as at least ‘happy’ living

within the borough. This is down on the 2013 figure of 94% and, based on the

sample sizes we used, represents a statistically significant fall. Of particular interest

will be the drop in the proportion that are ‘very happy’, from 48% to 34%.

Around five per cent of respondents are unhappy, similar to 2013 (6%),

36%

59%

3%

0%1%

48%46%

4%2%

1%

34%

53%

4%

1% 1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Very happy Happy Unhappy Very unhappy Don't know

2011 2013 2015



What is important to Charnwood residents?

Respondents were asked to identify which factors were most important in making

somewhere a good place to live, and were asked to choose three from a list of

twelve different themes. Figure 2 presents the proportion of residents that selected

each issue. Figures do not sum to 100% as respondents were able to select more

than one option.

Figure 2

As in 2011 and 2013, the most valued factor is personal safety, with nearly three

quarters of all respondents selecting ‘Feeling safe in my home and the local area’

as one of their three priorities. The second most important factor was ‘Cleanliness

and tidiness in my local area’; this has increased significantly from 30% in 2013 to

49% in 2015.

In 2015, it appears that views are stronger around a smaller number of priority

themes, rather than spread across a large number. This year, the three themes with

the highest percentages averaged 53% each, compared to 44% in the last survey.

7%

8%

18%

17%

21%

15%

35%

18%

29%

27%

31%

64%

4%

5%

13%

14%

14%

13%

43%

26%

36%

33%

30%

70%

4%

5%

8%

10%

18%

19%

22%

26%

31%

36%

49%

73%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

The availability of housing that you can afford to rent

Enough homes in the borough

A variety of entertainment and cultural facilities

Being able to go to sports and leisure facilities

Encouraging local prosperity, business and jobs

Looking after the environment

A variety of shops and markets

Good access to transport and parking

Being able to go to looked after parks & green

spaces

My rubbish collected on a regular and reliable basis

The cleanliness and tidiness of my local area

Feeling safe in my home and the local area

2015

2013

2011



Figure 3

We have been asked to

include a map illustrating

the three top priorities in

each Ward (see Figure 3). It

should be noted that the

sample sizes in some wards

are very small indeed (as

listed on page 8), although

it is noteworthy that ‘Feeling

safe in my home and the

local area’ emerges as the

top priority in every single

ward.



How satisfied are Charnwood residents?

Using the same list of twelve issues, respondents were then asked to state how

satisfied they were with each. Figure 4 presents these results, with issues sorted by

the proportion of residents that are at least ‘satisfied’ with the issue in 2015.

Figure 4

The broad pattern of satisfaction is similar to the one we observed in 2013.

However, only four of the twelve themes have seen an improvement in satisfaction

since the last survey. Satisfaction for the three key factors (safety, parks/green

spaces and rubbish collections) remains high at around 90% for each.

There has been a significant decline in one particular area – the availability of

housing that residents can afford to rent.

33%

45%

43%

68%

75%

78%

73%

72%

70%

82%

84%

86%

33%

53%

46%

68%

65%

77%

76%

77%

74%

87%

87%

92%

21%

52%

58%

64%

69%

71%

71%

74%

75%

85%

86%

93%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

The availability of housing that you can afford to rent

Enough homes in the borough

Encouraging local prosperity, business and jobs

Being able to go to sports and leisure facilities

A variety of entertainment and cultural facilities

Good access to transport and parking

A variety of shops and markets

The cleanliness and tidiness of my local area

Looking after the environment

Feeling safe in my home and the local area

Being able to go to looked after parks & green

spaces

My rubbish collected on a regular and reliable basis

Percentage of respondents satisfied with factor - 2015





Priorities versus Satisfaction

A useful piece of analysis is review the relationship between these two sets of figures; importance and satisfaction. Specifically, we

seek to identify whether factors that are considered to be important in making somewhere a good place to live also scored well in

terms of satisfaction. Figure 5 presents satisfaction scores along one axis and importance along the other.

Figure 5

With this type of analysis any themes in the lower right quadrant

would potentially be areas for improvement. These are factors

above average in importance but below average in satisfaction

(the pink lines denote average scores on each axis). As Figure 5

demonstrates, there are no factors within this part of the diagram,

suggesting that there are no significant areas of concern for

Charnwood to address. As in 2013, the factor closest to entering

this quadrant is ‘good access to transport and parking’; if CBC

were seeking an area to prioritise, this might be a valid option.



Respondents were also provided with the opportunity to add comments and

provide more detail behind the answers they gave to these questions. Some

examples are listed below to provide an indication of the type of issue that causes

concern for Charnwood residents. More detail is available in the raw dataset.

“I am lucky enough to buy my own home, but I am aware that there are

not enough council flats. And I may need to live in sheltered

accommodation or a home when I am old.” (Loughborough Hastings)

“Would like to see more high street/higher end shops in the area, I think

we have enough takeaway, charity and "pound" style shops locally.

Would like to see less empty shops.” (Ward not provided)

“Town is looking tatty; lots of empty shops altogether run down.”

(Loughborough Lemyngton)

“A complete lack leisure facilities in Shepshed underlines a lack of care

shown by the council towards Shepshed.” (Shepshed West)

“The markets are fantastic and should be more of a selling point for the

town.” (Loughborough Lemyngton)

“Access to green spaces is rapidly being eroded by poor planning

policies. Planners do not take any notice of residents; applications go on

for years; the allocation of conservation status means nothing.” (Ward

not provided)

“Too many coffee shops / cafes etc. Not enough support for community

groups. The assumption that everyone has access to a car when

positioning larger shops etc.” (Loughborough Hastings)

“Being senior citizens we do need to know that our wellbeing is

considered when decisions are made which affect us.” (Sileby)

“I am very proactive in reporting anything, bins not emptied etc, rubbish

around streets, dustbins left out on pavements for days and days and I

have to say everything I have every reported is dealt with very swiftly,

thank you. The range of waste and recycling is brilliant as is the

collection; I compare it to my daughter's in Buckinghamshire and hers is

literally 'rubbish' (no pun intended!) by comparison, long may it

continue.” (Shepshed East)



Overall satisfaction

As in 2013, residents were asked to state how satisfied they are in overall terms with

the way the Council runs things.

Figure 6

Figures in 2015 are almost identical to those reported in 2013. Overall, 82% of

residents are satisfied with the way CBC delivers its services (85% in 2013). Around

one in eight residents are ‘very satisfied’. Just more than 15% say they are

dissatisfied, compared with 12% in the last survey.

14.9%

69.7%

9.3%

3.3% 2.7%

13.2%

68.5%

11.4%

4.0% 3.0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Very satisfied Fairly satisfied Fairly dissatisfied Very dissatisfied Don't know

2013 2015



Are Charnwood’s communities cohesive?

Residents were then asked whether they felt their local area was a place where

different backgrounds got on well together. We have seen a decrease in the

proportion saying ‘yes’ in both 2013 and 2015, falling from 78% in 2011 to 67% this

year. This represents a statistically significant change, indicating we are seeing a

genuine change in views on this topic and not the result of statistical artefact.

The percentage saying ‘no’ to this question has not changed significantly, meaning

we are seeing a shift from ‘yes’ to ‘don’t know’.

Figure 7

78%

73%

67%

14%

18%

22%

8%

10%

11%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2011

2013

2015

Yes Don't Know No



Finding out about and accessing council services

The next question examined whether residents felt they could easily find out about

and access the services provided by Charnwood Borough Council.

Figure 8 presents the percentage of respondents that feel it is easy / not easy at

the borough level.

Figure 8

Overall, 79% of respondents feel it is at least ‘easy’ to find out about services

provided by CBC. This is very similar to the comparative figure for 2013, 82%,

although there has been a fall decrease in the percentage rating this as ‘very easy’

since 2013.

Just 10% felt it was hard to find out the information, but we have seen an increasing

proportion of respondents saying they do not know, implying a falling share of

residents are finding cause to try and access Council services.

15%

67%

11%

2%

5%

24%

58%

7%

2%

8%

21%

58%

8%

2%

11%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Very easy Quite easy Quite hard Very hard Don't know

2011 2013 2015



Those respondents that felt it was hard to find out information were then asked to

provide more details. Here are some of the comments made.

“Accessing the correct part of the organisation by phone is convoluted

and unintuitive. Staff take a long time to respond.” (Sileby resident,

aged 45-54)

“Because we have no amenities that are local for us, we have to use

cars or public transport, no parking facilities if we want to shop in

Shepshed unless you park at the supermarket which then makes it hard

for the supermarket shoppers to shop as the car park is full. No leisure

faculties for teenagers to go etc.” (Shepshed West resident, aged 45-54)

“Difficult to know what is going on without internet. Too much reliance

on that and lack of face to face.” (Quorn and Mountsorrel Castle

resident, aged 55-64)

“It is not very clear; you have to go through quite a few webpages to

actually get to where you want to get to. Also if you want to talk

specifically and have asked for this to a department through the call

centre they do not put you forward, and just give you vivid answers really

puts you off from contacting the council.” (Loughborough Southfields


“I have no idea what local facilities there are and lived here for 2 years.”

(Birstall Wanlip resident, aged 25-34)

“I would have no idea where to start. What information there is tends to

be centred around Loughborough. The Syston end tends to be

neglected.” (Syston West resident, age not provided)

“Most services are centralised, mainly in Loughborough. Other areas of

Charnwood are largely forgotten about. To catch a bus to my local

leisure centre in Mountsorrel takes almost an hour. I could drive there in

10 minutes. This is because the bus routes are based on getting to and

from Leicester and to and from Loughborough. Where bus services exist

between neighbouring villages they only run every few hours meaning

you either have to walk back, pay for a taxi, or wait hours.” (Anstey




What are residents’ channel preferences?

Respondents were asked for their views on which forms of communication they

would use to report a problem to the council. Figure 9 presents the results; figures

do not add up to 100% as respondents were able to choose more than one option.

This year, for the first time, respondents were able to choose ‘social media’ as an

option.

Figure 9

The same broad pattern of preferences appears, with channel types in the same

ranking order as in 2013. However, there is a clear increase in the proportion of

residents that would use the Council’s website (from 22% to 37% in 2015). There has

been a converse, albeit smaller, decrease in those opting for telephone as a

preferred channel.

Four in ten respondents said they would use email; similar to 2013 but it is perhaps

interesting to note there hasn’t been an increase in preferences for this method

over the past four years.

One in six would use the face-to-face channel via a council office.

73%

43%

23%

20%

11%

5%3%

72%

40%

22%

17%

7%5%

1%

64%

38%37%

16%

12%

3% 4%3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Telephone Email Through the

website

Going into

the office

Councillor Through

staff (i.e.

housing

officer)

Social

Media

None of the

above

2011 2013 2015



Are residents satisfied with their experience when contacting the

council?

During the past twelve months, 76% of respondents said that they had contacted

the council. Of these, the notable majority of residents (77%) are satisfied with the

experience they have had when contacting Charnwood Borough Council. This is

similar to the figure taken from the 2011 and 2013 reports (83% and 80%

respectively).

Figure 10 (n=815)

Although overall satisfaction levels are similar to 2013, there has been a shift within

this away from the ‘very satisfied’ end of the scale towards ‘fairly satisfied’.

15%

68%

12%

4%

36%

44%

12%

8%

27%

50%

14%

9%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Very satisfied Fairly satisfied Fairly dissatisfied Very dissatisfied

2011 2013 2015



How would residents prefer to hear about services and council

tax?

When asked what communication techniques would be most effective when the

council wishes to share information on services and council tax, we see continued

change in residents’ preferences. As identified in Figure 9, there is now a much

greater interest in using the website as means of receiving communication, leap-

frogging emails and the Council magazine in terms of rankings. Traditional ‘hard

copy’ media such as magazines and posters are less popular, although leaflets

remain the most preferred method.

Figure 11

Social media is still relatively unpopular compared with other channels, although it

continues to increase each year.

3%

3%

4%

5%

7%

20%

21%

39%

26%

58%

2%

5%

16%

14%

10%

28%

37%

44%

29%

44%

2%

6%

10%

11%

14%

28%

33%

35%

37%

45%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

None of the above

Texts (SMS)

Magazines

Posters

Facebook or Twitter

Local media

Council magazine

Email

Website

Leaflet / Letter

2015

2013

2011



Are residents happy with how CBC keeps them informed?

Residents were asked how satisfied they were with how the council keeps them

informed about their services. Figure 12 presents the headline results.

Figure 12

In 2013 we reported that 80% of respondents said they were happy with the way

the Council communicated with them. This year the figure has fallen to 72%,

representing a statistically significant fall in satisfaction.

The percentage that say they are dissatisfied has not increased that much, from

15% to 18%, but there has been an increase in the ‘don’t know’ category.

4%

71%

15%

2%

7%

12%

68%

12%

3%5%

10%

62%

15%

3%

10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Very satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Very dissatisfied Don't know

2011 2013 2015



Are residents happy with how CBC spends council tax?

Respondents were then asked how satisfied they were with how their council tax is

spent.

Figure 13

Again, there has been a reported decrease in the proportion of respondents that

are satisfied with the way in which council tax is spent, from 77% to 74%, although

on this occasion the change is not statistically significant.

There has actually also been a small decrease in the share that are dissatisfied,

meaning an increase in the proportion that say they do not know.

2%

52%

21%

6%

20%18%

59%

13%

4% 5%

15%

59%

12%

5%

10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%


2011 2013 2015



Do residents feel they can influence decision making?

This is a theme that has been assessed for a number of years, even prior to the

current version of the survey. Residents are asked whether they feel it is easy to

influence decisions that might affect them.

Figure 14

There has been a small decrease in the percentage of respondents that feel it is

easy to influence local decision making, from 16% to 12%. As in 2013 and 2011,

most residents still feel it is hard to sway these issues. Over the course of the three

surveys, the percentage that feel it is very hard to influence local decision making

has risen from 20% to 29%, a statistically significant increase.

0%

12%

45%

20%

24%

3%

13%

31%

25%

28%

1%

11%

33%

29%

25%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Very easy Fairly easy Quite hard Very hard Don't know

2011 2013 2015



Respondents were asked to provide more detail behind their answer to the

previous question. Here are some of the comments made.

“Although residents have opportunities to fill in surveys, attend public

meetings, have their say etc, it feels like we are not really listened to in

the end, and things happen regardless.” (Loughborough Garendon

resident)

“Anstey feels out of Charnwood as were quite away from

Loughborough and so near to Leicester, so it feels like we are not part of

the loop.” (Anstey resident)

“Decisions are taken behind closed doors that are rarely changed as a

result of public opinion. Many believe, as I do that, the Council is run by

a cabal that refuses to listen to arguments contrary to its own interests.

Democracy - what democracy?” (Loughborough Dishley and Hathern

resident)

“it seems that when people ring or call into Council Offices things still do

not get done which is very frustrating indeed.” (Syston West resident)

“CBC Planning Department consistently over-rides local wishes and also

the parish council. Quorn was a proper country village when we moved

here in 1980. It is now an ugly, small town with an inadequate supply of

local services. It is Charnwood Planning Department that is almost

entirely to blame for this.” (Quorn and Mountsorrel Castle resident)

“Council do not listen to the general public! Seems they do what house

builders want them to do.” (Sileby resident)

“Despite massive objections by people especially the core strategy the

council went ahead, backed down, didn't support the residents and we

are about to be hit with massive house building, destruction of green

spaces and traffic gridlock as of result of the selfishness, decisions

already made and totally apathy by this corrupt council.”

(Loughborough Dishley and Hathern resident)

“I think the Council has a planned path to follow and isn't influenced

much by opinions from residents.” (Loughborough Outwoods resident)



Do residents feel they can get involved in decision making?

An associated question then asks residents how satisfied they were with the

opportunity to get involved in local decision making.

Figure 15

Responses to this question are almost identical to those reported in 2013, with 31%

of stating that they are satisfied with the opportunity to get involved in local

decision-making. This represents a small but insignificant decrease on the last survey

(32%).

1%

35%

26%

8%

30%

4%

28%

24%

13%

30%

3%

28%27%

15%

27%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%


2011 2013 2015



Volunteering

The final set of questions asked residents for their interest in getting involved in local

decision making in a range of ways. Figure 16 presents the overall results for the

borough as a whole, with a comparison with the 2011 and 2013 results. This year,

the Area Forums option was replaced with “Get more involved in local decision

making e.g. through customer panels” so there is no historical data for that specific

option.

Get more involved in

local decision making

e.g. through customer

panels

Volunteering to

improve the

local area

Volunteering to

help run local

facilities

Figure 16

Perhaps unsurprisingly, there is more interest in getting involved in things like

customer panels than there is in active volunteering. One quarter of respondents

said they are already involved this way or would be interested in doing so in the

future.

Finally, we asked whether respondents would simply be willing to volunteer on a

general basis. There would appear to be a pool of around 6% of residents that

might be encouraged to get more involved, in addition to the 10% that say they

are already involved.

76%83%

89% 91%86% 90%

92%

19% 9%

7% 6%8%

8%3%

5% 8%4% 4% 6% 4% 4%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2011 2013 2015 2011 2013 2015 2011 2013 2015

Already involved

Want to get involved

No / Don't know



Appendix – Questionnaire Completion Rates

For those respondents that commenced but not did complete the full

questionnaire, Charnwood Council expressed an interest in identifying how far

individual respondents were getting through the questionnaire before opting out.

This might provide some insight into whether certain questions were dissuading

residents from participating in the survey.

The table below details how many respondents completed each question before

dropping out.

Question Missed

Question

Remaining

Respondents

% of Starting

Total

Started Survey - 1,215 100.0%

Postcode (clearly incorrect/out of area) 6 1,209 99.5%

How happy are you with living in the area? 50 1,159 95.4%

What are the three most important things

to you in the list below? 0 1,159 95.4%

Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are

you with the way the Council runs things? 39 1,120 92.2%

How satisfied are you with each of the

following? 0 1,120 92.2%

Do you feel that your local area is a place

where people from different backgrounds

get on well together?

3 1,117 91.9%

How easy is it for you to use / access the

services provided by the Council? 0 1,117 91.9%

How would you report a problem to the

Council if you needed to? 5 1,112 91.5%

How would you prefer to hear about our

services? 4 1,108 91.2%

How satisfied are you with how the Council

keeps you informed about our services? 10 1,098 90.4%

How satisfied are you with how our portion

of your council tax is spent? 0 1,098 90.4%

Do you feel it is easy to influence decisions

that might affect you in Charnwood? 4 1,094 90.0%

How satisfied are you with how you can

get involved in local decision making? 16 1,078 88.7%

Are you or would you like to get more

involved to... 0 1,078 88.7%

Where did you find out about this survey? 0 1,078 88.7%

Final Dataset 1,078

Charnwood Borough Council Equality Impact Assessment ... · The Corporate Plan 2016-2026 is a...

Documents

Transcript of Charnwood Borough Council Equality Impact Assessment ... · The Corporate Plan 2016-2026 is a...