The Community Interest Bank

1. The Community Interest Bank Nicky Byiers City of Edinburgh Council October 2012

2. Background • in 2010 the Council agreed to develop a pilot initiative to collect the experiences and views of inequality, discrimination and unfair treatment reported by individuals and groups with particular protected characteristics – called the Community Interest Bank • this work is being done in partnership with the Edinburgh Equality Network (EEN) - a forum for sharing information and discussion of equality issues in Edinburgh • the pilot was agreed and is being led by a part time officer within the Council’s Corporate Equality and Rights Unit • with the support of the EEN the lead officer developed a standard form to collect information from individuals and groups which asked for basic information from the respondent. Organisations who regularly worked with these client groups were commissioned to collect the information for us

4. How For the pilot the EEN agreed to three approaches for the completion and return of forms: • 10% of all returns were collected from Council staff who attended consultation and engagement meetings with equality groups in the normal course of their jobs. They noted instances of inequality, discrimination and unfair treatment that were discussed within a meeting; • 75% of returns were from local voluntary sector groups funded by the Council, who worked with clients with single or multiple protected characteristics to submit returns. This was done through focus groups or by asking clients if they were willing to contribute their experiences. These were organisations with whom we had prior experience of working; • 15% of returns were from Edinburgh and Lothians Regional Equality Council who were asked to submit returns as part of a wider contract with the Council.

5. How? (contd) • Organisations who have now contributed include: Edinburgh Community Accessibility Service; Edinburgh Women’s Aid, Sikh Sanjog; Bangladeshi Community Safety Meeting; Edinburgh Development Group; Welcoming group, CORE • the form asks for basic information about the meeting/event and this provides a timeline and context for the information. There is space to detail three key issues and provide any other comments. • the form is designed to be open and non-directive to allow as much information as possible to be provided • to maintain confidentiality no names are included and the database only contains information which the individual has agreed can be logged

6. Costs and Numbers • costs were approx £500 - £1000 per organisation, for the pilot, to cover venue, catering and staff time for the collection of information • to date nearly 500 entries have been logged into the database and we have started an initial analysis of the issues which have been raised

7. Why? • helps to develop a rich, qualitative database of evidence from individuals or groups, expressed in their own words, which supplements data that is more routinely collected across the Council and builds a more comprehensive picture of life in Edinburgh • encourages more collaborative working with the third sector and helps us to engage with a wider range of people • can be targeted at those groups in the community who are harder to reach and less likely to participate in Council consultation exercises, for example, refugees, asylum seekers and Sikh women have been specifically targeted • individuals can contribute from a safe setting through a group or organisation with whom they have regular contact

8. Why? (contd) • helped us to develop a centralised database to store community engagement information which will be made available to equality officers in all service areas • allows us to look at issues coming up over a time period – same issues or new ones • part of the development of a systematic and structured approach to gathering community engagement information • has piloted the use of the EHRC’s Equality Measurement Framework in a practical context (Rights based approach) • allows analysis by capability, protected characteristic, service area and keyword

9. Database Input Form

10. Things are not always what they seem

11. Take a leap of faith and ask people direct – and what they tell you may surprise you and change the way you approach your work

12. Analysis • a full analysis is currently being undertaken and will help inform the development of CEC’s equality outcomes. An initial read through of a selection of comments has provided an interesting insight into people’s experiences. Some examples are given below: Respite care “there’s not enough support at respite so people end up just sitting about…..” “I found respite really lonely because people wouldn’t talk to me…” “all my son did was walking, walking, walking or going to cafes. I took him out of it. Now he is at home…I think they’ve forgotten about us now. He used to do different activities…” “lots of changes…day centres being closed…our children wondered what they had done wrong. Why had they been moved? He missed his friends..”

13. Analysis (contd) Taxis “taxis are terrible – they never clamp me in properly and my wheelchair moves around when they drive too fast and my seat is not secure…” “taxis do not have secure enough ramps and they should have rubber mats because carpets don’t stick down…” “when booking a taxi I cannot request what type of taxi I need for my large wheelchair so often the wrong one arrives…” Other “the new bus tracking system is not visible for people with visual impairment…” “the timetable font size at bus stops is too small….” “straws should be included in catering at all public meetings…” “need dedicated class once per week for transgender swimming sessions…”

14. Analysis (contd) Attitudes “Chinese people feel they are viewed as taking part in organised crime by the police – growing cannabis, brothels, trafficking, extortion. Fear of reporting crime because of repercussions….” “my daughter never told friends she had a brother (with learning difficulties). She thought she would be bullied…” “someone told me to mind my own business and called me a spastic. They hit me on the head…” “I got off a bus and a man swore at me, he should respect people with learning difficulties. He was drinking on the bus…” “housing association client was ignored by workmen because she has a disability – were rude and dismissive when carrying out adaptations….” “told to fit in and behave like Brits…”

15. Some Key Themes Communication: • low literacy levels have a huge impact on people’s access to services. Issues raised through the CIB include not being able to read service information, not being able to follow signposts to get a service • there is a continuing need for translation services • support and help to fill in forms is becoming more restricted, but a lot of people rely on this service Knowing your community – and your community knowing you • community engagement does not yet tend to reach the most excluded communities • participants involved in consultations still feel they are not kept informed of changes made as a result of consultation exercises • the community feels there is still a limited awareness of accurate information about differences in culture and faith practices

16. Some Key Themes Identity Based Harassment • although confidence in reporting is improving there is still under-reporting of hate crime, particularly, within lesbian, gay, bi-sexual and transgender communities • many comments received on the ongoing stigma in relation to adults with learning disabilities • prejudice and lack of acceptance of some people with protected characteristics particularly when moving into a new area Day to Day Experience • overarching issue from many of the returns is poverty • experience of inequality and discrimination has a real impact on levels of confidence and self esteem

17. Challenges • the current form and approach tends to generate negative comment only – we also need to encourage feedback on what is done well and what works for people • presenting a long list of negative comments to other colleagues can cause tension. Need to ensure that everyone buys into this approach and is involved from the outset • some of the comments are made as part of a wider discussion which is not logged and so some of the context can be lost • maintaining a staff resource and funding to keep the data collection, input and analysis up to date • ensuring that this is seen as supplementing community engagement and consultation exercises and not replacing them • managing expectations of those who have contributed - making clear that the returns are helping to develop an emerging picture of community life in the City and that each individual issue raised will not be addressed

18. Challenges (contd) • ensuring the information is used to inform impact assessment, service improvement and outcome development • we have left organisations to gather the information in their own way but this has meant that some record an issue which has been raised by more than one person only once whilst others have submitted multiple returns with the same issue • returns are from organisations that are willing to take part – not a representative sample - analysis needs to recognise those limitations • ensuring consistency when categorising returns if different staff are involved in inputting data

19. Next Steps • further round of organisations to be contacted – this time a more open process inviting organisations to opt in for this work to see what client groups can be reached and encourage participation from organisations who represent clients for whom we have gaps in the evidence base • analysis and preparation of reports • addressing the issues and reporting back to our partners • using the information to inform equality and rights impact assessment, service improvement and outcome development • explore ways of inputting equality issues raised as part of all our consultation and engagement exercises into the database • longer term - consider extending to partner organisations perhaps initially through the community planning partnerships and the 2 total place projects in the City