City of York Council

Equalities Impact Assessment

Who is submitting the proposal?

Directorate:		People
Service Area:		Education Support Service
Name of the proposal:		Removal of Free Discretionary Transport to Tadcaster Grammar School
Lead officer:		Barbara Mands, Head of Education Support Service
Date assessment completed:		15 September 2023
Names of those who contributed to the assessment:
Name	Job title		Organisation	Area of expertise
Barbara Mands	Head of Education Support Service		CYC	Education Support Services
Helen Garnham	Children and Young People Transport Manager		CYC	Children and Young People’s transport

Step 1 – Aims and intended outcomes

1.2

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

The council is required to provide home to school transport for primary age children who live over 2 miles from their nearest school and for secondary age children who live over 3 miles away from their nearest school. This is to meet the duty in the 1996 Education Act. The act requires local authorities to provide transport to eligible children free of charge to support attendance at school. The council is not responsible for the cost of transport where; · Parental preference results in a pupil being placed in a school or facility other than the nearest appropriate schools; · To schools maintained by other authorities where admission to those schools is a result of parental preference unless that schools is the nearest school. In the case of Tadcaster Grammar School this is parental preference.

1.1

What is the purpose of the proposal? Please explain your proposal in Plain English avoiding acronyms and jargon.

To seek executive member permission to start consultation for phased removal of free discretionary transport to Tadcaster Grammar School to achieve previously agreed savings. This concerns legacy provision of free transport to a non-York school and does not affect SEND eligibility or pupils currently in receipt of the service. This ensures the elected member is informed about the implications to inform his decision making and that the process is consistent with the removal of other areas of free discretionary transport carried out previously.

1.3	Who are the stakeholders and what are their interests?
	The key stakeholders are: · North Yorkshire County Council regarding the removal of free discretionary transport to Tadcaster Grammar School. · STAR MAT and Tadcaster Grammar School where children currently attend. · Primary Schools where children attend from the York villages of Bishopthorpe, Copmanthorpe, Askham Richard and Askham Bryan. · Parents of pupils currently in receipt of the service attending Tadcaster Grammar School. · The children and young people who are being transported to facilitate their attendance at Tadcaster Grammar School, the preferred school.
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 implementation of a process to commence consultation for phased removal of free discretionary transport to Tadcaster Grammar School will achieve previously agreed savings. It will be consistent with the removal of other areas of free discretionary transport carried out previously. The proposal links to; · Education and Skills: High Quality Skills and Learning for All. Children and Young People will be able access a good or outstanding secondary school in York. Getting eligible children and young people to and from school each day via the Council’s home to school transport arrangements is a key part of the Local Authority’s education responsibilities. It is important therefore that any service is reliable, safe and cost effective. · Transport: Sustainable Accessible Transport for All. Getting Around Sustainably as it may cut congestion, pollution, and carbon emissions if children are attending a York school. · Economy and Good Employment: A fair, thriving, green economy for all . Well paid jobs and an inclusive economy as the use of local transport provides jobs within the local area and benefits the local economy.

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
Consultation Exercise		The implementation of the proposal requires the council to commence consultation to gather opinion from current users and other stakeholders about the phased removal of free discretionary transport proposal.

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
Change in parental preference is difficult to predict. It is unknown how many parents will choose to send their children to a York school if discretionary transport is removed to Tadcaster grammar school.		On going monitoring of annual admissions process and in year transfers.

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		The provision of home to school transport to York schools for eligible children ensures they are able to attend school	+	L
Disability		The home to school bus contracts use compliant vehicles	+	L
Gender
Gender Reassignment
Marriage and civil partnership
Pregnancy and maternity
Race
Religion and belief
Sexual orientation
Other Socio-economic groups including :		Could other socio-economic groups be affected e.g. carers, ex-offenders, low incomes?
Carer
Low income groups		Eligible children are provided with home to school transport	+
Veterans, Armed Forces Community
Other
Impact on human rights:
List any human rights impacted.		The right to Education	+

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 proposal will ensure that statutory home to school transport continues to be provided at an efficient and effective cost. This means that children are able to attend a good or outstanding school within the city of York Area and if they are eligible they will receive free statutory transport to a York school. The phasing in of the removal of free discretionary transport means that children currently receiving free discretionary transport can complete their secondary education at Tadcaster Grammar School.

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
Continue with the proposal		The savings have been previously agreed by the council. The current service is a legacy service and alternative arrangements can be put in place for children to access school places in York. The provision of transport is discretionary and the proposal is consistent with the previous decisions to end discretionary transport to faith schools.

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?
	New starters from September 2025 who are eligible for transport to a York School will receive free statutory provision. They will be able to attend a City of York secondary school where they will receive education in a good or outstanding provision.