Annex AB

 

City of York Council

Equalities Impact Assessment

 

 

 

Who is submitting the proposal?

 

Directorate:

 

People

Service Area:

 

Education Support Services

Name of the proposal :

 

School Admissions Consultation for 2024-2025

Lead officer:

 

Rachelle White

Date assessment completed:

 

14/12/2022

Names of those who contributed to the assessment :

Name                                         

  Job title

Organisation

Area of expertise

Rachelle White

School Admissions Manager

City of York Council

Education

Sarah Moir

School Place Planning Officer

City of York Council

Education

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Step 1 – Aims and intended outcomes 

 

 

1.1

What is the purpose of the proposal?

Please explain your proposal in Plain English avoiding acronyms and jargon.

 

To comply with School Admissions Code 2021 by consulting on the School Admission Arrangements for Admissions in 2024-2025

 

1.2

Are there any external considerations? (Legislation/government directive/codes of practice etc.)

 

. School Admissions Code 2021

 

1.3

Who are the stakeholders and what are their interests?

 

City of York Council – fulfilling their statutory duty to provide school places for children and young people living in York

Multi Academy Trusts – also complying with School Admissions Code 2021

Other Local Authorities – ensuring school place sufficiency in particular in schools close to LA borders

Families (parents & guardians, children & young people) – children and young people being allocated and attending school within the city.

 

1.4

What results/outcomes do we want to achieve and for whom?  This section should explain what outcomes you want to achieve for service users, staff and/or the wider community. Demonstrate how the proposal links to the Council Plan (2019- 2023) and other corporate strategies and plans.

 

The report requires the approval of the City of York Council Executive Member for Education to the changes to the admission arrangements of schools for which the City of York Council are the Admission Authority.

It also seeks to make reference to any changes being made by other Admission Authorities who are responsible for the admission arrangements within their schools where City of York Council are not the Admission Authority but where City of York Council must ensure school place sufficiency to meet their statutory duty.

 

 

             

 

 

Step 2 – Gathering the information and feedback 

 

2.1

What sources of data, evidence and consultation feedback do we have to help us understand the impact of the proposal on equality rights and human rights? Please consider a range of sources, including: consultation exercises, surveys, feedback from staff, stakeholders, participants, research reports, the views of equality groups, as well your own experience of working in this area etc.

 Source of data/supporting evidence

Reason for using

Survey Monkey

 

To collate consultation responses

Pupil Forecast data

 

To show pupil forecasts to evidence possible PAN changes

 

 

 

 

 

 

Step 3 – Gaps in data and knowledge

                                            

 

3.1

What are the main gaps in information and understanding of the impact of your proposal?  Please indicate how any gaps will be dealt with.

Gaps in data or knowledge

Action to deal with this

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Step 4 – Analysing the impacts or effects.

 

4.1

Please consider what the evidence tells you about the likely impact (positive or negative) on people sharing a protected characteristic, i.e. how significant could the impacts be if we did not make any adjustments? Remember the duty is also positive – so please identify where the proposal offers opportunities to promote equality and/or foster good relations.

Equality Groups

and

Human Rights.

Key Findings/Impacts

Positive (+)

Negative (-)

Neutral (0) 

High (H) Medium (M) Low (L)

Age

No impact as the admissions include school age children and also children who may have deferred

0

L

Disability

 

 

No impact as children with an EHCP are dealt with via SEN Team and those without are dealt with through mainstream and there is no impact

0

L

Gender

 

No impact

0

L

Gender Reassignment

No impact

0

L

Marriage and civil partnership

No impact

0

L

Pregnancy

and maternity

No impact

0

L

Race

No impact

0

L

Religion

and belief

No impact for CYC maintained schools. The removal of faith places at St Lawrences CE School will be dealt with by the Pathfinder MAT

0

L

Sexual

orientation

No impact

0

L

Other Socio-economic groups including :

Could other socio-economic groups be affected e.g. carers, ex-offenders, low incomes?

 

Carer

No impact

0

L

Low income

groups

No impact

0

L

Veterans, Armed Forces Community

No impact

0

L

Other

 

No impact

0

L

Impact on human rights:

 

 

List any human rights impacted.

No impact

0

L

 

 

Use the following guidance to inform your responses:

 

Indicate:

-         Where you think that the proposal could have a POSITIVE impact on any of the equality groups like promoting equality and equal opportunities or improving relations within equality groups

-         Where you think that the proposal could have a NEGATIVE impact on any of the equality groups, i.e. it could disadvantage them

-         Where you think that this proposal has a NEUTRAL effect on any of the equality groups listed below i.e. it has no effect currently on equality groups.

 

It is important to remember that a proposal may be highly relevant to one aspect of equality and not relevant to another.

 

 

High impact

(The proposal or process is very equality relevant)

There is significant potential for or evidence of adverse impact

The proposal is institution wide or public facing

The proposal has consequences for or affects significant numbers of people

The proposal has the potential to make a significant contribution to promoting equality and the exercise of human rights.

 

Medium impact

(The proposal or process is somewhat equality relevant)

There is some evidence to suggest potential for or evidence of adverse impact

The proposal is institution wide or across services, but mainly internal

The proposal has consequences for or affects some people

The proposal has the potential to make a contribution to promoting equality and the exercise of human rights

 

Low impact

(The proposal or process might be equality relevant)

There is little evidence to suggest that the proposal could result in adverse impact

The proposal operates in a limited way

The proposal has consequences for or affects few people

The proposal may have the potential to contribute to promoting equality and the exercise of human rights

 

 

 

 

Step 5 - Mitigating adverse impacts and maximising positive impacts

 

5.1

Based on your findings, explain ways you plan to mitigate any unlawful prohibited conduct or unwanted adverse impact. Where positive impacts have been identified, what is been done to optimise opportunities to advance equality or foster good relations?

The Admission Arrangements have a low impact as the process is fair, transparent and equitable for all.

  

                                                         

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Step 6 – Recommendations and conclusions of the assessment

 

 

6.1  

Having considered the potential or actual impacts you should be in a position to make an informed judgement on what should be done. In all cases, document your reasoning that justifies your decision. There are four main options you can take:

-    No major change to the proposal – the EIA demonstrates the proposal is robust.  There is no                     

   potential  for unlawful discrimination or adverse impact and you have taken all opportunities to

   advance equality and foster good relations, subject to continuing monitor and review.

-         Adjust the proposal – the EIA identifies potential problems or missed opportunities. This involves taking steps to remove any barriers, to better advance quality or to foster good relations.

 

-         Continue with the proposal (despite the potential for adverse impact) – you should clearly set out the justifications for doing this and how you believe the decision is compatible with our obligations under the duty

 

-         Stop and remove the proposal – if there are adverse effects that are not justified and cannot be mitigated, you should consider stopping the proposal altogether. If a proposal leads to unlawful discrimination it should be removed or changed.

 

Important: If there are any adverse impacts you cannot mitigate, please provide a compelling reason in the justification column.

Option selected

Conclusions/justification

 

-    No major change to the proposal.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-    the EIA demonstrates the proposal is robust.  There is no                     

   potential  for unlawful discrimination or adverse impact and you have taken all opportunities to

   advance equality and foster good relations, subject to continuing monitor and review.

 

 

 

 

Step 7 – Summary of agreed actions resulting from the assessment

 

 

7.1

What action, by whom, will be undertaken as a result of the impact assessment.

Impact/issue        

Action to be taken

Person responsible

Timescale

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Step 8 - Monitor, review and improve

 

8. 1

How will the impact of your proposal be monitored and improved upon going forward?   Consider how will you identify the impact of activities on protected characteristics and other marginalised groups going forward? How will any learning and enhancements be capitalised on and embedded?

 

 

We will consider and complete an EIA for each admission consultation going forward to take into account the impact of any changes