Agenda item

4.1       Danny Ruta, Director of Public Health gave a presentation to the Committee, a copy of which will be included in the agenda documentation. During the presentation the following key points were highlighted:         

·         There was a lack of information on the LGBT community and the Council’s Public Health Team would welcome any recommendations around ways to improve the quantity and quality of data available.

·         Public Health had the same equalities responsibilities as the Council overall and must have respect to the protected characteristics as set out in the Equalities Act 2010 and not discriminate against anyone. Public Health also had a responsibility for identifying any inequalities in health.

·         Public Health were responsible for updating the Lewisham Joint Strategic Needs Assessment. This was a requirement introduced following the Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 and is used to ensure the needs of the local population are understood and considered as a central part of the commissioning process.

·         Currently 10 public health outcomes performance dashboards were produced which aimed to monitor how the borough performed against key indicators. These were routinely monitored and updated and were based on the following areas: alcohol usage; cancer mortality; healthy weight; immunisation; maternal and child health; mental health; physical activity; sexual health; tobacco usage; and health checks for cardiovascular disease.

·         There was currently very little data available on the LGBT population and the team relied on surveys such as the ONS Annual Population Survey and the What About Youth (WAY) survey conducted on behalf of the Department of Health.

·         There were currently only 5 service user indicators where data on sexual orientation of users was collected. These were: HIV late diagnosis; health related quality of life for older people; smoking (adults); smoking (15 year olds); and proportion of the population meeting the recommended “5-a-day” at age 15. The data was, however, based on very small numbers and therefore had to be used with caution.

·         The Council’s Health and Wellbeing Board had statutory responsibility for the JSNA. Data review was an on-going process and they had a prioritisation process for reviewing data as it took 2 to 3 months to review each area.

·         The Health and Wellbeing board had agreed to set up a steering group who were inviting anyone to submit areas to be reviewed which would then be prioritised. It would be possible to submit a suggestion for a needs assessment looking at LGBT inequality in Lewisham for example. This would then be prioritised for action according to their process.

4.2       In the discussion that followed, the following key points were highlighted:

·         The website was going to be redesigned to make it more user-friendly and accessible.

·         Members of the Committee highlighted their surprise that there was so little information available on the LGBT community and that there had not been work done on all the equalities strands and how important it was that they were all fully covered.

·         A large percentage of the HIV population in England lived in London and it was a very important area to fully understand.

·         Concerns were raised about the sexual health provision for gay men in Lewisham and that they needed to be improved to ensure a good quality of service that helped to serve residents.

·         The Director of Public Health was asked to clarify whether other boroughs had the same problem in terms of access to data on the LGBT community. This information would be provided to the Committee.

·         It was suggested by members of the Committee that universities could be used to collect data.

·         The LGBT Foundation had produced a report on the importance of LGBT evidence being part of local JSNAs and guidance for local authorities. It could be very useful if key staff received training on this.

·         Members of the Committee spoke about issues such as the prevalence of HIV and drug usage in the LGBT community. As it was known that Lewisham had a higher than average population from the LGBT community, it was essential that there was an increased understanding of these and similar issues that affected the LGBT community.

·         The Committee’s review was focussing on the LGBT community but concerns were raised that there could be other areas of the protected equalities strands that were similarly missing from the data in the JSNA.

4.3       Adam Bowles, Head of Organisational Development and HR, and Andrew Jacobs, Organisational Learning and Talent Management Manager, gave a presentation to the Committee, a copy of which will be included in the agenda documentation. During their presentation, the following key points were highlighted:

·         The rates of disclosure amongst staff were increasing and the Council was able to build up an increased understanding of the workforce. In 2016/17, there was information on 55% of the workforce which was similar to many other London boroughs. The highest disclosure rate was 76% in LB Newham and the lowest was 4% in LB Richmond.

·         A new HR system was due to be in place in 2018 and it was hoped this would improve data collection.

·         Recruitment data was much more robust as 90% of people who applied for posts listed their sexual orientation. Last year there were 5,300 applicants for posts in Lewisham. 2.0% of applicants listed their sexual orientation as Lesbian or Gay and 0.9% listed bisexual. The figures for those offered positions was 1.9% Lesbian or Gay and 0.8% bisexual. Of those actually hired 1.9% were Lesbian or Gay and 0.4% bisexual.

·         There were 186 leavers (non-schools) during the last financial year, 62% of which declared their sexual orientation when they left. 3.8% of all leavers identified at LGB.

·         There was a Lewisham LGBT staff forum and there were new members attending and increasingly strong links with the HR department. The forum met regularly and had a representation at many events.

·         HR were looking to discuss increasingly working with the forum to discuss policies and proposals and for the forum to consider implications for the LGBT community. The forum had worked with Lewisham Public Health looking at their End of Life Care Review.

·         There was a new process in place to welcome new staff to Lewisham which included a new online module highlighting the staff forums available to join. There was also a new face to face coffee with the Mayor session for new employees and representatives from the LGBT and other staff forums are invited to these events to meet new employees.

·         The introduction of the GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) in May 2018 will have implications on how data is collected and stored.

·         Training on equalities and diversity needed to be delivered to teams on a needs basis as there was evidence that mandatory training was not successful in terms of outcomes.

·         There had been no LGBT related grievances, discipline or tribunal cases in the last 3 years at Lewisham.

·         There were new online courses on equality and diversity available to staff and more work was being planned to introduce new courses on these themes.

4.4       In the discussion that followed, the following keys points were raised:

·         Equalities data on service users such as those accessing libraries or housing services could be gathered.

·         Work needed to be done to consider how people wished to self-identify to ensure the language used was helpful. This needed to be worked on further and built into the new HR IT service.

·         It was important that when requesting data from staff it was clearly communicated to them how the data would be stored (anonymously and separately from employees’ profiles) and the reasons for collecting it.

·         The Chairs of the staff forums meet with the Executive Director for Community Services as part of the Equalities Board meetings.

·         HR were working with the BAME staff forum to support them moving forward following their previous Chair leaving the organisation.

·         Work could be done to facilitate Lewisham staff forums to meet with similar staff forums in other major borough employers such as Lewisham Hospital and Goldsmiths University.

·         Work was being done to improve information collected in relation to grievances, raised through the appraisal process. Concerns were raised that this process was currently not up to scratch.

RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

That the discussion and possible recommendations mentioned at this meeting as listed above, be used to help shape the Committee’s review recommendations when being agreed at the next meeting on 13 December 2017.