FINAL EQUALITY ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK

The Equality Analysis Framework

This Equality Analysis Framework is underpinned by a 6 month collaborative research project and forms part of an expanding dialogue across the HE sector in relation to EqIAs. The project has sought to understand and respond to criticisms and obstacles to the effective use of equality impact assessments (EqIAs) across the sector. It has also explored the link between the emerging focus on co-production and EqIA practice. This Equality Analysis Framework is a work in progress and the sector is encouraged to view this as a dynamic collaborative tool to support proportionate, context driven approaches as a means of ensuring more effective and inclusive decision-making processes. This Framework is intended for use by those with EDI expertise and suggests an approach to support decision makers to engage with EqIAs. A separate accessible EqIA Toolkit for decision makers on EqIAs is also available.

How to Use This Framework

Quick access to tools and reference materials

Return to How to Use This Framework page.

How to Use This Framework

Use the circular hubs to jump between the three core areas.

This interactive tool is designed to support you through the Equality Analysis Framework step by step. You can explore the content in any order, but we recommend starting at the beginning and following the process through to the end for a full understanding.

Navigating the Tool Click on icons to open deeper content and get helpful tips Look for interactive buttons to access information throughout Access resources and checklists

Explore the Three Core Areas Capacity Building & Development Foundational elements that support meaningful EqIAs. Indicative Equality Impact Assessment A step-by-step process for carrying out an EqIA. Monitoring & Sharing Guidance on embedding, reviewing, and sharing outcomes.

Start Framework

Go back to previously viewed page.

Return to the main circular Framework hub at any time.

Training

Capacity building

Developing co-production cultures

Embedding EqIAs

Developing Data systems

Aligning existing activity

Designing anEqIA

1. Proportionality Assessment

2. Scoping Assessment

3. Information Gathering

4. Conversations

5. ImpactAssessment

6. Action Planning

Linking to existing activity

Monitoring and evaluation

Publishing and transparency

EQUALITY ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK

Capacity Building & Development

Indicative Equality Impact Assessment

Monitoring & Sharing

Capacity building and development

• Process Integration: Embed EqIAs into institutional processes.
• Data Systems: Develop systems for collecting and analyzing both qualitative and quantitative data.
• Alignment: Integrate EqIA efforts with existing initiatives (e.g., Charters, Access and Participation Plans, Gender Pay Gap reporting).
• Contextualisation: Consider co-producing an EqIA framework tailored to the institution’s specific context.

To support meaningful EqIAs, institutions should focus on:

• Training: Provide regular, accessible training on EqIAs and the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) for staff and decision-makers.
• Capacity building: Allocate time and value to Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) work, and support networks and student voice initiatives.
• Co-production Culture: Foster a culture of co-production, treating students and staff as partners.

Training

Designing an institutional EqIA

Capacity building

Capacity building and development

Aligning existing EDI and wider work

Developing and embedding a culture of co-production

Developing data collection and analysis

Embedding EqIAs into institutional processes

Training

CASE STUDY OF TRAINING SUPPORT

The research shows decision makers often misunderstand EqIAs, leading to low confidence, poor engagement, and viewing them as a bureaucratic task rather than a meaningful process. This highlights the need for better training and promotion of the PSED and EqIAs

Explore further

What did you say?

Training

Awareness and cultural reframing:

Objective: Reframe EqIAs as strategic tools for cultural change, not just compliance tasks.

Click for actions to meet objective

Training and support:

Objective: Empower decision-makers to conduct effective EqIAs through adequate training and resources.

Click for actions to meet objective

Capacity building

CASE STUDY OF CAPACITY BUILDING

The research shows that institutions need to boost support and resources for decision-makers to carry out effective EqIAs, beyond just providing training.

Explore further

What did you say?

Value and recognition:

Objective: Ensure that EqIA work is properly valued and recognised within the institution, encouraging ongoing participation and showing respect for those involved.

Simplification and accessibility:

Click for actions to meet objective

Objective: Make EqIA processes more accessible and user-friendly.

Click for actions to meet objective

Capacity building

Community networks and stakeholders (including students):

Champion network and peer support:

Objective: Develop a support system to encourage and guide the use of EqIAs and ensure compliance with the PSED.

Objective: Enable diverse groups to actively participate in equality-related initiatives, including EqIAs.

Click for actions to meet objective

Click for actions to meet objective

Developing and embedding a culture of co-production

CASE STUDY OF DEVELOPING AND EMBEDDING A CULTURE OF CO-PRODUCTION

The research highlights that for co-production to be effectively integrated into EqIA processes, institutions must first foster a culture that supports proportionate co-production. It recommends embedding co-production into overall decision-making practices throughout the process, not just during EqIAs. Co-production is a collaborative process where all participants, especially those with lived experience, share their expertise and engage in open dialogue (including differing views) to make decisions transparently and collectively, without prioritizing any single perspective. Further guidance is available in the publication 'Co-production with staff and students: Principles and practices for promoting equality and change'.

Co-production with staff and students: Principles and practices for promoting equality and change

Explore further

What did you say?

Embedding co-production principles:

Objective: Embed co-production principles into university structures and decision-making processes.

Click for actions to meet objective

Co-production

Integrating co-production into EqIAs:

Objective: Facilitate co-production principles into EqIA processes through appointment of Lived Experience Leads/EqIA Working Groups.

Click for actions to meet objective

Embedding EqIAs into institutional processes

CASE STUDY OF EMBEDDING EQIAS INTO INSTITUTIONAL PROCESSES

The research highlights the importance of fully integrating EqIAs into institutional processes. This integration is essential to enhance decision-making, promote ownership and accountability, and prevent EqIAs from being treated as a mere formality. To achieve this, institutions should embed EqIAs into their standard operations.

Explore further

What did you say?

Mainstreaming and integration:

Objective: Integrate EqIAs into everyday decision-making.

Click for actions to meet objective

Ownership and accountability:

Objective: Promote institutional and individual ownership and accountability for EqIAs.

Click for actions to meet objective

Embedding

Monitoring and continuous improvement:

Proportionality and context:

Objective: Ensure ongoing evaluation and improvement of EqIA practices.

Click for actions to meet objective

Objective: Ensure EqIAs are applied in a proportionate and context-sensitive way.

Click for actions to meet objective

Developing data collection and analysis

CASE STUDY ON DEVELOPING DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The research highlights the need for institutions to improve how they collect and analyze equality data. This is essential to help decision-makers engage effectively with EqIAs.

Explore further

What did you say?

Strengthening institutional data collection mechanisms:

Objective: Enhance and broaden institutional data collection systems to better support EqIA practices.

Click for actions to meet objective

Developing data systems

Accessing lived experience:

Objective: Integrate qualitative data around lived experience into the EqIA process.

Click for actions to meet objective

Building capacity and data analysis skills:

Objective: Enhance decision makers' understanding and confidence in collecting and analysing equality data to support effective EqIAs.

Click for actions to meet objective

Aligning existing activity

CASE STUDY ON ALIGNING EXISTING ACTIVITY WITH EQIA PROCESS

The research highlights that decision-makers are more likely to value and take responsibility for EqIAs when these are clearly connected to existing institutional EDI strategies, broader initiatives, and compliance obligations. To support this, efforts should be made to align EqIAs with ongoing work.

Explore further

What did you say?

Mapping of existing EDI related activity:

Objective: Develop a comprehensive overview of current institutional EDI initiatives, frameworks, and compliance obligations that intersect with or can be enhanced by the EqIA process.

Click for actions to meet objective

Aligning

Integrating and prioritising:

Objective: Integrate EDI activity mapping with the EqIA process to ensure alignment, data-driven decision-making, and mutual reinforcement.

Click for actions to meet objective

Designing an institutional EqIA

CASE STUDY ON DESIGNING A CONTEXTUAL EQIA

The research highlights that due to the complex and varied nature of higher education institutions, using standardised EqIA processes is often ineffective. Instead, institutions are encouraged to develop their own context-specific EqIAs to foster more meaningful involvement from decision makers.

Explore further

What did you say?

Co-producing the institutional EqIA process:

Objective: Co-produce a context based EqIA with student/staff communities.

Click for actions to meet objective

Designing an EqIA

Scope and detail:

Objective: Define the scope and detail of a contextual EqIA.

Click for actions to meet objective

Co-production with staff and students: Principles and practices for promoting equality and change

EqIAs and the law infographic

EqIA checklist for decision makers

Answers to complex EqIA questions

EqIA Flowchart

The following suggests an indicative EqIA process for higher education institutions which aligns with the PSED and is also underpinned by principles of co-production and proportionality. This indicative process is supported by a checklist, responses to complex questions and a flow chart to guide decision makers through a simplified, reflective, and question-driven approach. However, institutions are encouraged to develop their own robust, context-specific institutional EqIA process (as explored in the Capacity Building and Development section of this Equality Analysis Framework).

Indicative Equality Impact Assessment

• Proportionality assessment
• Scoping
• Information gathering
• Conversations
• Impact assessment
• Action planning

Although institutions are encouraged to develop a context specific approach, an indicative EqIA process may include the following general steps:

Go to page

Go to page

Explore further

1. Proportionality Assessment

2. Scoping

6. Action Planning

Indicative Equality Impact Assessment

5. Impact Assessment

3. Information Gathering

4. Conversations

What is a proportionality assessment?

CASE STUDY OF PROPORTIONALITY ASSESSMENT

Proportionality Assessment

COMPLEX QUESTION: What are some worked examples of a proportionality assessment in a HE context?

Q&A

EqIA Full Checklist

Proportionality Checklist

Explore further

What did you say?

Questions to ask when making a proportionality assessment:

If the answer to any question is ‘yes’ or ‘maybe’, proceed to a Scoping. If ‘no’, ensure inclusive practice is maintained and stay alert to any changes during implementation.

If the answer to any question is ‘yes’ or ‘maybe’, proceed to a Scoping. If ‘no’, ensure inclusive practice is maintained and stay alert to any changes during implementation.

Is this a significant policy/practice which could significantly affect large numbers [significant measure]?

Is this a policy/practice which is likely to involve substantial public interest and scrutiny [high interest measure]?

Proportionality Assessment

If the answer to any question is ‘yes’ or ‘maybe’, proceed to a Scoping. If ‘no’, ensure inclusive practice is maintained and stay alert to any changes during implementation.

If the answer to any question is ‘yes’ or ‘maybe’, proceed to a Scoping. If ‘no’, ensure inclusive practice is maintained and stay alert to any changes during implementation.

Is this a policy/practice which has an obvious high potential for adverse impacts on marginalised groups [high risk measure]?

Is this a policy/practice which requires an EqIA for legal or wider compliance reasons [compliance measure]?

The designated decision maker should conduct an initial proportionality assessment to determine the appropriate level, depth, and scope of an Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA), based on the policy/practices' significance and potential impact. Institutions may offer guidance on different levels of EqIA (e.g., detailed, basic, inclusive) to support context-specific approaches.

If the answer to any question is ‘yes’ or ‘maybe’, proceed to a Scoping. If ‘no’, ensure inclusive practice is maintained and stay alert to any changes during implementation.

Does the policy/practice involve a complex issue which requires further exploration of how distinct groups may be impacted [complex measure]?

Explore further

Designing an EqIA

Examples of proportionality assessments indicating no progression to scoping may include:

Proportionality Assessment

• Minor adjustments to practices unlikely to affect substantial numbers (e.g. changing a core textbook on a small module).
• Routine operational/administrative decisions that have limited scope and impact (e.g. changing coffee supplier in the university canteen).
• Low risk areas with minimal potential for adverse impacts on protected groups (e.g. introducing a new staff expenses form).
• Policies or practices with very narrow focus or affecting small numbers of people (e.g. adjusting the frequency or timing of a departmental meeting).

(Note: inclusive practice is still required)

Building capacity and providing training on proportionality assessments will help decision-makers engage more effectively. Creating a context-specific list of decisions that may not need equality impact assessments could be beneficial. Decision-makers should remain open to revisiting the need for policy or practice scoping if new impacts or increased significance arise later in the process. A decision and justification for not proceeding with an EqIA should be recorded (e.g. via a file note/email etc).

What is scoping?

CASE STUDY OF SCOPING

Scoping

COMPLEX QUESTION: Is it ever appropriate to use anecdotal evidence in a scoping as part of an EqIA?

Q&A

EqIA Full Checklist

Scoping Checklist

Explore further

What did you say?

Scoping

The decision maker should lead the Scoping process. The proportionality assessment and Scoping may overlap and can sometimes be combined into a single assessment.

The scoping process should be integrated during the development or review of any new policy/practice that requires assessment, based on the outcome of the proportionality assessment.

Scoping can be informed by existing knowledge and evidence held by decision makers and any Lived Experience Leads/EqIA Working Groups, as well as insights gathered through ongoing engagement with the staff and student communities.

Scoping should be a collaborative process, involving any Lived Experience Leads/EqIA Working Groups and decision-makers, to assess potential positive or negative impacts on 'distinct groups' (as defined by the institutional EqIA process)

During scoping, the depth of analysis should match the significance of the policy/practice. While the process doesn't need to be overly extensive, it should be based on objective, evidence-based evaluation and not just anecdotal evidence.

Q&A on anecdotal evidence

The involvement of Lived Experience Leads/EqIA Working Groups can ensure co-production approaches to EqIAs

Explore further

Scoping

• What is the purpose of the proposed policy/practice?
• How will the proposed policy/practice seek to achieve this purpose?
• Who will benefit from the proposed policy/practice?

• Who may be negatively impacted by the proposed policy/practice?
• Are there any ‘associated aims’ attached to the proposed policy/practice which may benefit or negatively impact on distinct groups?

Possible questions to ask to assist with scoping:

The decision maker (and any Lived Experience Lead/EqIA Working Group) should clearly define the purpose of the policy/practice to allow for an objective assessment. If the initial scoping identifies a potential negative or positive impact on a specific community or protected group, a full assessment should follow. If no such impact is identified, a justification for not conducting a full assessment should be recorded. In some cases, scoping may be quick and simple and clearly show no need for further assessment.

What is information gathering?

CASE STUDY OF INFORMATION GATHERING

Information Gathering

COMPLEX QUESTION: What are some ways of overcoming data collection challenges as part of the EqIA?

Q&A

EqIA Full Checklist

Information Gathering Checklist

Explore further

What did you say?

Information Gathering

Helpful tip

Explore further

The information gathering stage should be a collaborative effort involving decision maker and any Lived Experience Lead/EqIA Working Group. While some relevant questions may have already been asked and data may have been collected during the initial scoping, this stage aims to deepen understanding of potential impacts and is likely to lead to the gathering of further information.

If the scoping stage identifies possible impacts of a policy or practice, the information gathering stage can begin to better understand how it may affect distinct groups.

The information collected should include both quantitative and qualitative data, covering the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010. It should also consider socio-economic and other relevant groups (as required by the institutional EqIA), and where possible, explore how these identities intersect.

Information Gathering

• What do we need/want to know?

• Who can assist in deciding what evidence of potential impact on distinct groups is required and where can it be located?

• What existing evidence of potential impact on distinct groups is available?

• What evidence is needed to ensure all relevant perspectives are considered?

• What additional information is required/where are the gaps in evidence regarding potential impact on distinct groups and how can this be gathered?

Possible questions to ask to assist with information gathering:

A lack of information should not prevent impact assessment. Any gaps should be addressed where possible. For new policies or practices, limited data may be available beyond that available at scoping, so informed judgments must be made. The conversations stage will help strengthen these judgments.

What are conversations?

CASE STUDY OF CONVERSATIONS

Conversations

Co-production with staff and students: Principles and practices for promoting equality and change

COMPLEX QUESTION: How do you embed co-production principles into the EqIA process and move beyond consultation?

Q&A

EqIA Full Checklist

Conversations Checklist

What did you say?

Explore further

Conversations

Conversations with potentially affected distinct groups can help fill knowledge and data gaps identified during the information-gathering stage.

Engage with potentially affected distinct groups (as identified by the institutional EqIA) to discuss the details and effects of a proposed policy or practice, especially if initial assessment suggest it may negatively impact them.

Engaging with potentially affected groups is recommended, but should be proportionate and appropriate to the policy/practices' complexity, significance, and potential impact on those groups.

These conversations also help uncover potential impacts on individuals with lived experience of social issues or vulnerabilities that may not have been identified earlier.

Explore further

Conversations

Where possible, conversations should use inclusive and flexible methods aligned with a co-production approach. If a Lived Experience Lead or EqIA Working Group is involved, they can lead these conversations. If not, the decision maker may conduct them, but this may shift the process from co-production to consultation.

Engagement with distinct groups can take various forms such as meetings, focus groups, or joining existing staff/student gatherings. Decision makers should aim to meet participants in their own spaces to build trust, and all conversations should follow co-production principles as much as possible.

Existing staff/student networks and data collection methods can be used, but engagement should be proportionate and respectful of participants' time.

What is an impact assessment?

CASE STUDY OF CARRYING OUT AN IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Impactassessment

COMPLEX QUESTION: How do you assess intersectional/cumulative equality impacts as part of the EqIA?

Q&A

EqIA Full Checklist

Impact assessment Checklist

What did you say?

Explore further

Impact assessment

After gathering relevant information and feedback through conversations, the next step is to conduct an impact assessment of the policy or practice. This should be done collaboratively (following a co-production approach) by any Lived Experience Lead/EqIA Working Group, and the decision maker. Together, they assess whether the proposed change will have a positive, negative, or neutral impact on distinct groups, and determine if this aligns with the initial findings from the scoping.

For more complex or significant policies or practices, a deeper impact analysis may be required to understand specific effects on identified groups. This might involve additional information gathering or conversations, considering unintended consequences, or identifying potential conflicts with other measures.

Impact assessment should be a collaborative, thoughtful and reflective process, offering a chance to explore alternative approaches to the policy or practice that reduce negative impacts or enhance positive outcomes.

Explore further

Impact assessment

Helpful information

While further exploration may be appropriate, the EqIA process isn't meant to account for every possible scenario. It's important to recognize that differences in impact across groups aren't always negative. A policy or practice can have a mix of positive, negative, and neutral effects, especially when it includes multiple components.

POSITIVE IMPACTThe evidence demonstrates that there is no potential for discrimination or any negative impact on distinct groups and that all opportunities to promote benefits of the proposed policy/practice for such groups should be taken.

NEGATIVE IMPACTThe evidence identifies potential negative impact of the proposed policy/practice on distinct groups.

When designing an institutional EqIA, institutions may choose to assess impacts on groups beyond those protected under the Equality Act 2010. The process may also encourage intersectional or cumulative impacts depending n the institution's specific context and approach.

NEUTRAL IMPACTThe evidence identifies that the proposed policy/practice does not have a negative or positive impact on distinct groups (contrary to initial Scoping evidence).

What is action planning?

CASE STUDY OF ACTION PLANNING

Action Planning

COMPLEX QUESTION: How to ‘action plan’ where an EqIA demonstrates there are negative impacts of a policy/practice which cannot be mitigated?

Q&A

EqIA Full Checklist

Action plan Checklist

Explore further

What did you say?

Action Planning

Helpful information

If the impact assessment shows a positive or neutral effect, the policy or practice can proceed and its benefits should be shared and published. If a negative impact is identified, where possible the policy/practice should be adjusted to reduce or remove the harm. If there is evidence of unlawful discrimination, the policy/practice should be stopped or changed immediately to avoid legal consequences.

As part of a co-production approach, any Lived Experience Lead/EqIA Working Group, and decision maker should collaboratively create an action plan for the proposed policy or practice, based on the information gathered and conversations from earlier stages.

The action plan should clearly outline any potential positive or negative impacts on distinct groups and explain the reasoning behind decisions in order to promote honesty and transparency.

Clear accountability for the action plan is essential. Each action should be assigned to a responsible person with a realistic timeline, and senior management must hold ultimate accountability. Progress should be regularly reviewed through a monitoring and evaluation process

Explore further

Complex Q&A on negative impacts

Action Planning

CHANGE THE POLICY/PRACTICEby identifying Changes that reduce or eliminate the negative impact. This may have been explored with marginalised communities at earlier stages. However, you may need to engage in further community conversations led by the Lived Experience Lead/EqIA Working Group on how this might be achieved in practice.

ACTION PLANNING There are three options which will need to be supported by a clear co-created action plan if a NEGATIVE impact has been found:

STOP THE POLICY/PRACTICEbecause the evidence demonstrates a negative impact and this outweighs the overriding purpose of the policy/practice and is therefore unjustifiable. Expert advice should be accessed.

JUSTIFY THE NEGATIVE IMPACTif the policy/practice cannot be adapted to eliminate or reduce the impact and there is an overriding need to implement the policy/practice. However, justification should always be a last resort and attempts to eliminate or reduce the negative impact should have been fully explored first. Expert advice should be accessed.

Monitoring and Sharing

Following an EqIA, it is important to conduct follow-up actions to ensure the assessment is effectively implemented and aligned with institutional activity and strategy. This helps build trust with staff and students, fosters transparency, and promotes inclusive decision-making. EqIAs should be treated as dynamic, evolving processes that respond to new evidence over time. Suggested post-assessment steps include reflective practices and continuous engagement to embed inclusivity into mainstream institutional practices.

Publishing and transparency

monitoring and sharing

Linking to existing work

Monitoring and evaluation

COMPLEX QUESTION: How can an EqIA action plan link to Gender Pay Gap reporting?

CASE STUDY OF ALIGNING ACTION PLANS WITH EXISTING ACTIVITY

Q&A

Linking to existing work

EqIA Full Checklist

Sharing and Monitoring Checklist

Explore further

What did you say?

Linking to existing work

Existing institutional activity should be aligned with the Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) process. When creating an EqIA action plan and conducting follow-up actions, it’s essential to integrate this work with broader institutional initiatives to ensure alignment and effectiveness. The action plan should connect with related institutional efforts where there are shared goals or synergies. Examples of activity which EqIA action planning may link to includes (but is not limited to):

• Athena Swan/Race Equality Charters
• Gender Action Planning
• Gender Pay Gap Reporting
• Research Excellence Framework/Teaching Excellence Framework
• Access and Participation Plans
• Vitae HR Excellence in Research
• EDI initiatives (e.g. Disability Confident, Social Mobility Pledge, Stonewall, University Mental Health Charter, Age Friendly Employer Pledge, Disabled Student Commitment, Better Health at Work Award, White Ribbon, Universities of Sanctuary, Hidden Disabilities Sunflower, Mindful Employer, Armed Forces Covenant, Care Leaver Covenant etc)
• Human rights compliance

COMPLEX QUESTION: When is it appropriate to externally publish an EqIA?

CASE STUDY OF PUBLISHING AND TRANSPARENCY AROUND EQIAS

Q&A

Publishing and Transparency

EqIA Full Checklist

Sharing and Monitoring Checklist

Explore further

What did you say?

Complex Q&A on external publication of EqIAs

Publishing and Transparency

Publishing the EqIA on the institution’s website can show transparency and good practice. External publication is especially appropriate when the EqIA supports broader legal or compliance requirements, such as Gender Pay Gap (GPG) reporting or Access and Participation Plans (APP).

Before publishing a policy or practice, the EqIA must be approved by the decision maker and senior accountable manager or committee. The policy/practice should then be shared with potentially impacted groups identified earlier, along with details of any positive impacts on them.

Any remaining negative impacts of the policy/practice should be communicated to potentially impact groups, along with details of actions to reduce these impacts. If negative impacts persist, they must be transparently justified and monitored. Any positive impacts should also be shared and promoted. The EqIA and action plan should then be shared internally to promote trust, transparency and a commitment to inclusivity.

COMPLEX QUESTION: How do you effectively evaluate process following an EqIA to improve future practice?

CASE STUDY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION ACTIONS FROM EQIAS

Q&A

Monitoring & Evaluation

EqIA Full Checklist

Sharing and Monitoring Checklist

Explore further

What did you say?

Monitoring & Evaluation

Implementing an EqIA is not the final step; ongoing monitoring and evaluation are essential. EqIAs should be part of a cyclical process, with regular reviews by decision-makers and any involved Lived Experience Leads or EqIA Working Groups. Setting future review dates and being responsive to unexpected impacts is recommended beyond these review dates. While short-term policies may require less monitoring, evaluating the process can still provide valuable insights. A co-production approach encourages collaborative continuous reflection and learning to improve future practices.

For more info on co-production, Lived Experience Leads and EqIA Working Groups

Helpful tip

Research Project Reports

This Equality Analysis Framework has been developed and is underpinned by a 6-month research project carried out with EDI leads from across England, Scotland and Wales as well as a series of student focus groups. Links to the very detailed full research report and a more accessible summary research report can be found here.

Full Report

Summary Report

More resources

The PSED, EqIAs and Legal Framework: A Summary

Research participants emphasised the need for greater understanding by decision makers of the link between the legal framework, the Public Sector Equality Duty and EqIA process. This provides an infographic summary of the legislative framework with links to accessible information for decision makers.

Legal Framework Infographic

More resources

Equality AnalysisFlowchart

Research participants emphasised the need for simplification of the EqIA process to encourage decision makers to engage and take ownership of impact assessment. This provides a basic indicative equality analysis flowchart for use by decision makers.

Equality Analysis Flow Chart

More resources

EQIA Example Template Repository (Simple and Complex)

The research has clearly demonstrated the benefits of sharing approaches and information in relation to EqIAs. Institutions are therefore encouraged to utilise this space to share EqIA resources and in particular context based EqIA exemplar templates to develop good practice and sector reflection in this area. This page is still under development. If you are interested in sharing an EqIA template please email chantal.davies@chester.ac.uk.

More resources

HEI EQIA Case Studies

The research has clearly demonstrated the benefits of sharing approaches and information in relation to EqIAs. Institutions are therefore encouraged to utilise this space to share EqIA resources and in particular EqIA case studies to encourage good practice and sector reflection in this area. This page is still under development. If you are interested in sharing an EqIA case study please email chantal.davies@chester.ac.uk.

More resources

Example EQIA Checklist For Decision Makers Across HE

Research participants emphasised the need for simplification and accessibility around EqIAs. It was perceived that EqIAs need to be simpler, less formulaic, proportionate and more accessible to avoid disengagement due to complexity. Equally it was perceived that encouragement is needed to ensure decision makers move away from rigid form filling to more flexible, evidence-based critical thinking. The following provides a simple checklist approach for decision makers which seeks to encourage a reflective, question driven approach towards impact assessment.

EqIA Checklist

More resources

Complex Questions

Research participants recognised the need for building confidence and understanding around EqIAs. This was particularly important in relation to more complex elements of an EqIA process. The following provides some suggested responses to more complex and difficult questions around equality impact assessment in the HE sector.

Complex Q&As

More resources

Co-production with staff and students: Principles and practices for promoting equality and change

The EqIA research sought to consider the possibilities of aligning co-production principles with EqIA processes to encourage greater engagement and inclusive decision making across the HE sector. Co-production is a collaborative process where all participants, especially those with lived experience, share their expertise and engage in open dialogue (including differing views) to make decisions transparently and collectively, without prioritizing any single perspective. Underpinned by the data gathered, these Students and Staff as Co-producers in HE Equality Assessment Principles have been developed.

Co-production with staff and students: Principles and practices for promoting equality and change

Please get in touch with Chantal Davieschantal.davies@chester.ac.uk for further information or feedback on this framework.

Mainstreaming and integration

Actions to meet objective:

• Embed EqIAs into governance, planning, and operational workflows with prompts for review.
• Make EqIAs standard in project initiation and business case templates.
• Require EqIA consideration at the start of policy or practice development.
• Include EqIA outcomes in governance and approval processes.
• Link EqIA actions to risk registers and institutional reporting.
• Align EqIA outcomes with equality charters and institutional KPIs.

What are some worked examples of a proportionality assessment in a HE context?

Proportionality should be a core consideration throughout any EqIA process and will be central to the decision as to whether to proceed with an exploration of the impacts of a policy/practice in the first place. Research participants suggested the need for context based institutional examples of proportionality assessments to assist in building decision-making confidence. Some context-based examples are shown in the table. See more detailed explanation in the full Complex Questions resource.

Accessing lived experience

Actions to meet objective:

• Encourage use of qualitative methods of data collection by decision makers to fully understand equality impacts.
• Involve diverse groups in data gathering and analysis in line with co-production principles.

Integrating and prioritising

Actions to meet objective

• Use mapping to identify high-impact areas and prioritse EqIA efforts.
• Include relevant mapped EDI (and wider) activities in EqIA templates with prompts for decision makers to consider data from mapped sources (e.g. Athena Swan data, APP data etc).
• Leverage existing data (e.g. use of APP data to assess the impact of a new admissions policy) to strengthen EqIA evidence.
• Create feedback loops by sharing EqIA findings with relevant EDI and wider activity leads to inform broader strategies, policies and charter submissions.

How do you embed co-production principles into the EqIA process and move beyond ‘consultation’? Whilst many research participants described some level of engagement with potentially impacted distinct groups as part of their institutional EqIA, this often fell short of an authentic co-production approach and could more appropriately be described as consultation. Whilst consultation is generally considered to be a process where decision makers seek input and feedback from stakeholders as part of the decision-making process, co-production is a collaborative process where stakeholders and decision makers work together as equal partners to design, deliver and evaluate a policy/practice. The following may be relevant considerations when seeking to embed co-production (rather than just consultation) into the EqIA process: + Build an environment to support co-produced decision making more generally across the institution which ensures that staff/students are partners across the decision-making process and not just brought in to explore the impact of a proposed policy/practice at the later stages. Rather, staff/students should be partners in developing the policy/practice from the start. + Consider the Students and staff as co-producers in HE equality assessment Principles developed as part of this research project. + Consider engaging a Lived Experience Lead or developing an EqIA Working Group (representing diverse staff/student voices) and work with them throughout the EqIA process as suggested in the Indicative EqIA to inform the scope of the EqIA; identify impacts, risks and opportunities; inform information gathering; assess impacts and develop mitigation strategies; develop co-created action plans; monitor and evaluate the EqIA action plan. + Consider proportionate approaches towards co-production as part of the EqIA being careful to avoid ‘exhausting’ staff/student stakeholders and ensure inclusive, flexible, proportionate approaches to dialogue.

sharing and monitoringChecklist for EQIA

Internal Sharing + Internally share the EqIA across wider networks + Include both positive and negative impacts and mitigation efforts External Publication (if appropriate) + Consider publishing the EqIA on the institutional website + Ensure alignment with legal/compliance obligations (e.g. GPG Reporting, APP) and existing EDI work (e.g. Athena Swan, REC) Monitoring + Is there a scheduled EqIA monitoring date which is flagged and tracked? + Are there mechanisms to evaluate ongoing or emerging equality impacts? + Are stakeholders involved in the monitoring process + Are the monitoring outcomes recorded and accessible + Is the level of monitoring proportionate to the policy/practice scale and duration?

Sign-Off and Review + Has the EqIA been signed off by the decision maker and any accountable senior manager? + Has any institutional paperwork been completed? Community Engagement + Share EqIA with impacted groups + Communicate positive impacts to relevant groups + Communicate remaining negative impacts and actions to reduce them + Provide justification for continuing with the policy/practice if negative impacts remain Reflection and Learning (EqIA process evaluation) + Lived-Experience Lead, EqIA Working Group, appropriate stakeholders, decision maker reflect on:

• What worked well and what could be improved
• Can any learning be applied to future EqIAs

Is it ever appropriate to use anecdotal evidence in a scoping assessment as part of an EqIA? Gathering objective and appropriate information is vital in carrying out an EqIA. However, the research suggests that ‘anecdotal evidence’ may be a relevant part of decision makers considerations at the Scoping stage of an EqIA to identify gaps in information which need further exploration or to provide nuance to existing data. Anecdotal evidence generally refers to personal stories, informal feedback of observations shared by individuals or groups. In the context of an EqIA, this may come from staff/student conversations, comments in meetings or focus groups, feedback from staff networks, observations from staff/students. It may be appropriate for decision makers to utilise anecdotal evidence as part of the Scoping with the following guidance on how to use effectively: + Decision makers should be encouraged to recognise that such evidence should be used as a supplementary insight to complement quantitative data or to highlight gaps in data that need further exploration but that it should not be used to draw definitive conclusions. However, it may be a good starting point for further Scoping. + Where anecdotal evidence is considered, the source and context should be documented clearly (where did it come from? in what context was it shared?). + It may be possible to look for themes and trends in anecdotal evidence if similar stories or concerns have arisen from multiple sources. + Importantly, anecdotal evidence at the scoping stage can guide on further targeted data collection and inquiry in the later stages of an EqIA and also assist in informing which distinct groups to engage with.

What are conversations?

Conversations, in this context, refer to meaningful engagements with distinct groups who may be affected by a proposed policy or practice, especially when early assessments suggest potential negative impacts. These discussions aim to uncover overlooked effects, particularly on individuals with lived experience of social issues or vulnerabilities, and help address knowledge or data gaps. Effective conversations should be inclusive, flexible, and ideally follow co-production principles where affected individuals are actively involved in shaping outcomes. Depending on the situation, these engagements can take various forms such as meetings or focus groups, and should be proportionate to the policy’s complexity and impact. Trust-building, respectful use of participants’ time, and meeting people in their own spaces are key to successful conversations.

What is an impact assessment?

An impact assessment is a collaborative and reflective process used to evaluate whether a proposed policy or practice will have positive, negative, or neutral effects on different groups. Sometimes conducted with input from stakeholders with lived experience and decision makers, it helps ensure that changes to policies/practices align with initial findings and consider unintended consequences. The process may involve deeper analysis for complex issues and can explore alternative approaches to minimize harm or enhance benefits. It also allows institutions to assess broader or intersectional impacts beyond those protected under the Equality Act 2010.

Community networks and stakeholders

Actions to meet objective:

Offer tailored support—such as training, funding, and facilitation—to strengthen the ability of community and stakeholder networks to engage in the EqIA process.

Is it ever appropriate to use anecdotal evidence in a scoping assessment as part of an EqIA? Gathering objective and appropriate information is vital in carrying out an EqIA. However, the research suggests that ‘anecdotal evidence’ may be a relevant part of decision makers considerations at the Scoping stage of an EqIA to identify gaps in information which need further exploration or to provide nuance to existing data. Anecdotal evidence generally refers to personal stories, informal feedback of observations shared by individuals or groups. In the context of an EqIA, this may come from staff/student conversations, comments in meetings or focus groups, feedback from staff networks, observations from staff/students. It may be appropriate for decision makers to utilise anecdotal evidence as part of the Scoping with the following guidance on how to use effectively: + Decision makers should be encouraged to recognise that such evidence should be used as a supplementary insight to complement quantitative data or to highlight gaps in data that need further exploration but that it should not be used to draw definitive conclusions. However, it may be a good starting point for further Scoping. + Where anecdotal evidence is considered, the source and context should be documented clearly (where did it come from? in what context was it shared?). + It may be possible to look for themes and trends in anecdotal evidence if similar stories or concerns have arisen from multiple sources. + Importantly, anecdotal evidence at the scoping stage can guide on further targeted data collection and inquiry in the later stages of an EqIA and also assist in informing which distinct groups to engage with.

Strengthening institutional data collection mechanisms

Actions to meet objective:

• Audit current data sources for relevance and compliance with legal and sector requirements (e.g. PSED, HESA).
• Encourage voluntary data collection beyond minimum requirements by identifying data gaps.
• Collect disaggregated equality data where feasible.
• Monitor equality data across key stages of staff/student life cycles (e.g. recruitment/enrolment; promotion/progression; performance/attainment).
• Incorporate qualitatitve data on lived experiences through surveys and other tools.
• Improve access to equality data via a centralised, user-friendly data hub.

Ownership and accountability

Actions to meet objective:

• Integrate equality analysis metrics into institutional KPIs.
• Align individual and departmental responsibilities with institutional EDI objectives.
• Embed EqIA responsibilities in job descriptions, performance appraisals and team objectives.

Value and recognition

Actions to meet objective:

• Integrate EqIA duties into staff/decision maker workload models to reflect the time and effort required.
• Formally acknowledge contributions from student and staff groups involved in EqIA, through:
• Time allocations
• Incentives
• Public acknowledgements or other forms of recognition

What is action planning?

Action planning involves (sometimes collaboratively) developing a clear and accountable plan based on earlier impact assessments and discussions about a proposed policy or practice. This plan should outline potential impacts on different groups, justify decisions transparently, and assign responsibilities with timelines. If negative impacts are identified, the plan must explore options to either change the policy to reduce harm, stop it if the harm is illegal or outweighs its purpose, or (only as a last resort) justify the impact if the policy is essential. Regular monitoring and senior management accountability are key to ensuring progress and integrity.

How can an EqIA action plan be linked to Gender Pay Gap reporting? The research pointed to a range of institutional activity which could be linked and better aligned with the EqIA process both to avoid replication of work but also to ensure that EqIAs are better mainstreamed into institutional activity and the benefits of impact assessment fully realised. A common reference to wider work linked to EqIAs was the legislative obligation on public bodies under Gender Pay Gap (GPG) Reporting Regulations (and forthcoming disability/race pay gap reporting). Linking the EqIA process and action plan to GPG reporting is a strategic mechanism for ensuring that gender disparities in pay are not only identified but also addressed through targeted measurable actions in the following way: + GPG data can be used to inform the EqIA – by engaging with GPG reports and data, this may serve as baseline evidence in an EqIA highlighting gender disparities across the institution which will be relevant in the development of and assessment of impact of policies/practices. + Conversely, an EqIA and consequent action plan may provide evidence of the underlying causes of the GPG particularly through exploration of lived experiences in relation to matters such as occupational segregation, barriers to promotion, flexible working etc. An EqIA action plan may also provide evidence of mitigations which can be fed into GPG reporting and activity. + Subsequent annual GPG reporting may be used to evaluate linked EqIA actions to avoid replication of activity. + By linking EqIAs with GPG reporting, this will ensure greater accountability and transparency and assist in supporting systemic change towards gender equality.

INFORMATION GATHERING Checklist for EQIA

Data Considerations + Review data including information already gathered during the Scoping stage. + Identify and address gaps in information. + Proceed with assessment even if data is limited. + Use the Conversations stage to support judgement where data is lacking. Key Questions to Guide the Process + What do we need or want to know? + Who can help determine what evidence is needed and where to find it? + What existing evidence is available? + What evidence is needed to ensure all perspectives are considered? + Where are the gaps, and how can we gather the missing information?

When to Begin + Scoping stage indicates potential positive or negative impacts. Collaboration opportunities + Involve any Lived Experience Lead and/or EqIA Working Group. Types of Information to Collect + Quantitative data (e.g., statistics, demographics). + Qualitative data (e.g., lived experiences, interviews). + Data covering all protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010. + Consider whether to Include socio-economic groups and other marginalised communities in line with institutional guidance, if relevant. + Consider intersectionality/cumulative disadvantage (how identities overlap, cumulate and interact) in line with institutional guidance.

If Negative Impact Identified + Have the following options been considered:

• Change the policy/practice to reduce/eliminate impact
• Stop the policy/practice if disproportionate unjustifiable negative impact and/or is unlawful discrimination
• Justify the impact only if no alternatives exist

Action Plan Development + Have actions been co-created with stakeholders? + Does the plan include:

• Description of the impact
• Justification for decisions made
• Steps to mitigate or eliminate negative impacts
• Timeline for implementation

Accountability + Are all actions assigned to named individuals? + Are timescales for each action realistic and achievable?

action plan Checklist for EQIA

Preparation + Has any Lived Experience Lead/any EqIA Working Group been involved? + Have distinct groups been meaningfully engaged in assessing impact and developing an action plan? Impact Assessment Outcome + Has the impact been clearly identified as:

• Positive (benefits should be promoted)
• Neutral (policy/practice can proceed)
• Negative

+ Is there evidence supporting the identified impact? + For positive or negative impacts, action should be recorded.

What is scoping?

Scoping is the initial process of identifying whether a proposed policy or practice might positively or negatively affect specific groups. Led by the decision maker and involving relevant lived experience stakeholders (where appropriate), it uses existing evidence and engagement to make an early assessment of potential impacts. If any significant potential impacts are found, a full equality impact assessment is required; if not, a clear justification for not proceeding must be recorded.

When is it appropriate to externally publish an EqIA? In England there is no requirement to publish an EqIA and recent Government guidance has emphasised this noting that any such requirement on a public body could have a negative impact on the decision makers’ considerations (Government Equalities Office, 2023). The research demonstrated that the decision by institutions on whether to publicly share EqIAs often depended on the matter being assessed. Proportionate approaches towards external publication were evident. For some universities, significant EqIAs of public interest were published externally and some also referred to publication where an EqIA action plan aligned with commitments under Athena Swan and/or the Race Equality Charters or wider legal commitments. The research suggested that external publication of EqIAs may assist in promoting accountability and engagement of decision makers. It was also suggested that external publication of an EqIA may enhance transparency and build trust with stakeholders. Therefore, when deciding whether to externally publish an EqIA the following pointers for action may be relevant: + Adopt a proportionate approach – tailor the decision to publish an EqIA to the significance and the sensitivity of the issue being assessed; consider case by case evaluation rather than a blanket policy. + Align with wider commitments – publish EqIAs that support or align with wider institutional commitments (both voluntary and mandatory). + Promote transparency and trust – use external publication of EqIAs to enhance transparency and build trust with stakeholders; highlight how publication can demonstrate accountability and engage decision makers more effectively. + Encourage HE sector wide dialogue – consider external publication to share best practice across institutions to foster consistency and mutual learning in EqIA publication strategies.

Simplification and accessibility

Actions to meet objective:

• Develop simple templates and step-by-step guides for decision-makers.
• Create FAQs/exemplars/case studies to address common concerns and misconceptions.
• Provide interactive tools to guide users through the EqIA process.

How do you effectively evaluate process following an EqIA to improve future practice? It is important to encourage decision makers and stakeholders to reflect on the EqIA process post assessment. This will ensure that decision makers critically reflect on the process not only to identify areas for improvement in future assessment but also to recognise the benefits of the process and encourage more meaningful engagement, accountability and ownership. Reflection on the EqIA process may be encouraged as part of an institutional EqIA form or may be gathered separately. Possible prompts for evaluation may include: + Implementation evaluation: have actions been implemented in a timely manner? Were there barriers or delay to implementation and what was the reason for this? + Process reflection: was there any feedback on the EqIA process from the distinct groups engaged with? What worked well during the process and how can this be fed forward into future EqIAs? What elements of the process could be improved upon in future EqIAs? What were the challenging elements and how can the institution provide support in overcoming these challenges? It is important that this evaluation is fed into a feedback loop of continuous improvement around EqIAs with processes being developed based on the critical reflections of decision makers and stakeholders. Equally, these reflections may be integrated into broader institutional EDI strategies.

Awareness and cultural reframing

Actions to meet objective

• Run internal awareness campaigns on EqIA benefits.
• Share success stories and testimonials from EqIA champions and engaged decision makers.
• Promote EqIAs as drivers of better decisions and organisational values.
• Showcase impactful past EqIAs to highlight their value as mechanisms for positive change.

sharing and monitoringChecklist for EQIA

Internal Sharing + Internally share the EqIA across wider networks + Include both positive and negative impacts and mitigation efforts External Publication (if appropriate) + Consider publishing the EqIA on the institutional website + Ensure alignment with legal/compliance obligations (e.g. GPG Reporting, APP) and existing EDI work (e.g. Athena Swan, REC) Monitoring + Is there a scheduled EqIA monitoring date which is flagged and tracked? + Are there mechanisms to evaluate ongoing or emerging equality impacts? + Are stakeholders involved in the monitoring process + Are the monitoring outcomes recorded and accessible + Is the level of monitoring proportionate to the policy/practice scale and duration?

Sign-Off and Review + Has the EqIA been signed off by the decision maker and any accountable senior manager? + Has any institutional paperwork been completed? Community Engagement + Share EqIA with impacted groups + Communicate positive impacts to relevant groups + Communicate remaining negative impacts and actions to reduce them + Provide justification for continuing with the policy/practice if negative impacts remain Reflection and Learning (EqIA process evaluation) + Lived-Experience Lead, EqIA Working Group, appropriate stakeholders, decision maker reflect on:

• What worked well and what could be improved
• Can any learning be applied to future EqIAs

How do you assess intersectional/cumulative equality impacts as part of the EqIA? One of the most difficult and complex elements of an EqIA is assessing potential intersectional/cumulative impacts. The research suggests that there is evidence of poor understanding of decision makers on how to engage with intersectional/cumulative impact analysis. The research suggested the need for greater focus by decision makers on lived experience of those from marginalised communities many of whom faced intersectional/cumulative disadvantage. It was considered that greater engagement with student/staff voices as part of the EqIA process rather than over reliance on quantitative data would assist decision makers in better understanding complex impacts. The following may be relevant considerations when assessing intersectional/complex equality impacts as part of an EqIA: + Embed and build capacity for holistic strategies into decision making by encouraging decision makers to consider how a policy might affect individuals in multiple ways from the start of the process. This will assist in building confidence in inclusive decision making. + Provide support through collecting and analysing data that can be broken down by multiple characteristics to assist in greater institutional engagement with exploring patterns of intersectional/cumulative disadvantage. + Engage with lived experience through conversations and discussions with individuals who represent intersecting identities and encourage more engagement with qualitative data to understand nuanced experiences which go beyond the ‘numbers’. + Provide context based examples and evidence of intersectional/cumulative disadvantage and complex barriers for decision makers to support confidence and understanding. + Develop mitigation strategies to impact that address intersectional/cumulative impacts, not just single-issue solutions.

Scope and detail

Actions to meet objective

• Ensure the EqIA meets the minimum requirements of the PSED.
• Decide whether to include consideration beyond the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010.
• Assign responsibility for the institutional EqIA and establish monitoring and evidence mechanisms.
• Differentiate the EqIA process depending on context (e.g. for strategic v operational decisions).
• Integrate proportionality into the EqIA process.
• Consider a tiered EqIA approach based on decision type and scope.
• Decide on the inclusion of intersectional and cumulative impact assessments.
• Embed EqIAs into decision making processes to ensure ownership and accountability.
• Determine the need for distinct templates or tools based on decision type.
• Decide whether to base the process on principles of co-production.

Building capacity and data analysis skills

Actions to meet objective:

• Train decision makers in data literacy and analysis.
• Create templates and toolkits for data collection and analysis.
• Promote and train on intersectional and cumulative data analysis.
• Support the use of internal and national data for benchmarking, gap identification, and evaluating policy impacts.

Embedding co-production principles

Actions to meet objective

• Integrate co-production into strategies, policies, and governance from start to finish, including evaluation.
• Develop internal systems and secure long-term funding for training, facilitation, and stakeholder engagement around co-production.
• Establish reward schemes to acknowledge co-production efforts.
• Ensure diverse and inclusive participation, especially from those with lived experience.
• Build trust-based, respectful partnerships that promote shared decision-making and knowledge exchange.
• Encourage continuous learning and flexible, open dialogue throughout co-production processes.

Deeper Analysis (if needed) + Is a more detailed impact analysis required due to complexity? + Are there unintended consequences or conflicts with other practice/policies? + Is further Information Gathering or Consultation necessary? Broader Considerations + Have intersectional and cumulative impacts been considered if relevant? + Have impacts beyond the protected characteristics been assessed if relevant? Outcome Classification + Positive Impact: No discrimination (benefits for distinct groups need to be promoted). + Negative Impact: Evidence of potential harm to distinct groups. + Neutral Impact: No significant positive or negative effects identified.

Impact assessment Checklist for EQIA

Preparation + Has all relevant data and evidence been gathered? + Have lived experiences and stakeholder Conversations been documented? + Has the initial Scoping assessment been reviewed? Collaborative Assessment + Has a Lived Experience Lead/EqIA Working Group been involved in the impact assessment if relevant? + Has there been any wider collaboration on assessing the potential impact on distinct groups? Impact Evaluation + Is the impact positive, negative, or neutral? + Have opportunities to reduce harm or enhance benefits been explored?

Training and support

Actions to meet objective:

• Offer clear guidance on EqIA legal and practical impacts.
• Promote understanding of the PSED and its link to EqIAs.
• Train senior leaders and governing bodies.
• Make PSED and EqIA training mandatory for new staff.
• Provide regular refresher and on-demand training.
• Tailor training to specific roles and decision making contexts.
• Develop internal support systems and allocate long-term funding for co-production training and development.

What is a proportionality assessment?

A proportionality assessment is a quick check to decide how much time and effort should go into an Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA). It helps you judge whether a policy/practice is likely to have a big, complex, or risky impact (especially on marginalised groups) and whether a full EqIA is needed.

When is it appropriate to externally publish an EqIA? In England there is no requirement to publish an EqIA and recent Government guidance has emphasised this noting that any such requirement on a public body could have a negative impact on the decision makers’ considerations (Government Equalities Office, 2023). The research demonstrated that the decision by institutions on whether to publicly share EqIAs often depended on the matter being assessed. Proportionate approaches towards external publication were evident. For some universities, significant EqIAs of public interest were published externally and some also referred to publication where an EqIA action plan aligned with commitments under Athena Swan and/or the Race Equality Charters or wider legal commitments. The research suggested that external publication of EqIAs may assist in promoting accountability and engagement of decision makers. It was also suggested that external publication of an EqIA may enhance transparency and build trust with stakeholders. Therefore, when deciding whether to externally publish an EqIA the following pointers for action may be relevant: + Adopt a proportionate approach – tailor the decision to publish an EqIA to the significance and the sensitivity of the issue being assessed; consider case by case evaluation rather than a blanket policy. + Align with wider commitments – publish EqIAs that support or align with wider institutional commitments (both voluntary and mandatory). + Promote transparency and trust – use external publication of EqIAs to enhance transparency and build trust with stakeholders; highlight how publication can demonstrate accountability and engage decision makers more effectively. + Encourage HE sector wide dialogue – consider external publication to share best practice across institutions to foster consistency and mutual learning in EqIA publication strategies.

Methods of engaging in Conversations (examples) + Individual meetings + Focus groups or workshops + Agenda item in existing community meetings + Attend student society or staff network meetings Accessibility and Trust + Offer to meet participants in their own spaces. + Respect participants’ time and contributions. + Use existing staff/student networks and data collection methods where appropriate. During the Conversations + Follow Students and Staff as Co-producers in HE Equality Assessment Principles. + Document insights and feedback clearly and respectfully. After the Conversations + Reflect on new insights or concerns raised. + Communicate outcomes and next steps to participants.

conversations Checklist for EQIA

Before engaging in Conversations + Identify potentially impacted marginalised groups. + Assess the relevance and proportionality of Conversations based on the policy’s complexity and impact. Planning the Conversations + Choose inclusive and flexible engagement methods. + Consider the Students and Staff as Co-producers in HE Equality Assessment Principles. + Decide who will facilitate the Conversations:

• Lived Experience Lead or EqIA Working Group if appropriate
• Decision maker (if no lead/group exists – note this may be consultation, not co-production)

Proportionality and context

Actions to meet objective:

• Create a tiered EqIA framework supporting proportionate application of EqIAs.
• Develop context-based examples of proportionate approaches to EqIAs.

Mapping of existing EDI related activity

Actions to meet objective

• Audit all current EDI-related strategies, policies, activities and charters identifying responsible departments, committees, or individuals.
• Create a mapping matrix aligning each EDI activity with potential EqIA touchpoints. Identify synergies and gaps where EqIA findings can enhance existing initiatives or vice versa (e.g. using EqIA data to support Athena Swan or APPs and vice versa).

• Collaborate with stakeholders (e.g. Athena Swan SAT chairs, HR, student services etc) to validate the mapping and gather feedback from diverse staff, student groups, and external partners.
• Keep the mapping dynamic and regularly updated to support EqIA planning, prioritisation, and reporting.

Clarity of Purpose + Is the purpose of the policy/practice clearly defined? + Have the intended outcomes been articulated by the decision maker? Key Scoping Questions + What is the purpose of the proposed policy/practice and how will it achieve this purpose? + Who will benefit and/or who may be negatively impacted from the policy/practice? + Are there any associated aims that could affect distinct groups? Decision Point + Is there evidence of negative impacts or positive benefits for any distinct group? Yes → Proceed to the next stage of assessment. No → Document justification for not continuing further. Efficiency Check + Is this a straightforward case with no potential impacts? If yes, confirm no further exploration is needed.

Scoping Checklist for EQIA

Leadership & accountability + Has a decision maker been identified to lead the Scoping process? + Has a Proportionality assessment been completed to justify this step? Collaboration & Inclusion + Are there Lived Experience Leads and/or EqIA Working Groups involved? + Is the Scoping being conducted collaboratively with others? Evidence Gathering + Is existing evidence and knowledge being used? + Is the Scoping based on objective evidence (not just anecdotal)? Proportionality + Is the Scoping proportionate to the policy/practice decision?

Co-producing the institutional EqIA process

Actions to meet objective

• Form an EqIA co-production group and include diverse stakeholders - students, academic/professional staff, EDI experts, union reps, community partners, and decision makers - with a focus on underrpresented/marginalised groups.
• Use the Co-production with staff and students: Principles and practices for promoting equality and change to guide and support the collaboration.
• Collaboratively determine the purpose and scope of the EqIA process including which policies/practices, areas etc it will cover (e.g. curriculum design, student services, recruitment and promotion etc).
• Co-create the EqIA process including principles and values, process steps, templates and tools, and decision making criteria.
• Continuously monitor, evaluation, and refine the process with the EqIA co-production group.

Monitoring and continuous improvement

Actions to meet objective:

• Establish mechanisms to review EqIA quality and impact.
• Gather feedback from decision makers to improve EqIA tools and training.
• Publish annual reports on EqIA implementation and outcomes.
• Adjust the EqIA process based on monitoring and evaluation findings.

Proportionality Assessment Checklist for EqIA

Next Steps Based on Responses + If any answer is “yes” or “maybe” → Proceed to a Scoping. + If all answers are “no” → Ensure: – Inclusive practices are embedded throughout and decision and justification recorded. – Ongoing monitoring for changes that may alter the initial Proportionality assessment. Examples of Decisions that may not require EqIA but may still require awareness of potential equality impacts + Minor changes with limited impact (e.g. changing a textbook in a small module). + Routine administrative decisions (e.g. switching coffee suppliers). + Low-risk updates (e.g. new staff expenses form). + Narrow-scope actions (e.g. adjusting meeting times).

Initial Assessment by Decision Maker + Identify the need, depth, and scope of EqIA based on the policy or practice. + Refer to any existing context-based institutional EqIA guidance (e.g. detailed, basic, inclusive). Key Questions to Guide Proportionality + Could this policy/practice significantly affect large numbers of people? (Significant measure) + Does it have a high potential for adverse impacts on marginalised groups? (High risk measure) + Is it a complex issue requiring deeper exploration of group impacts? (Complex measure) + Is it likely to attract substantial public interest or scrutiny? (High interest measure) + Is an EqIA required for legal or compliance reasons? (Compliance measure)

What is information gathering?

Information gathering is a collaborative stage in the EqIA process that follows the initial scoping phase. Its purpose is to gather information to deepen understanding of how a policy or practice may affect different groups, particularly those with protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010, as well as socio-economic and possibly other relevant groups. This stage involves collecting both quantitative and qualitative data, identifying evidence gaps, and making informed judgments when data is limited. It involves decision-makers in ensuring diverse perspectives are considered, especially where identities intersect.

How to ‘action plan’ where an EqIA demonstrates there are negative impacts of a policy/practice which cannot be mitigated? Where an EqIA has identified negative impacts of a policy/practice which cannot be removed or mitigated, consideration usually needs to be given as to whether the policy/practice should continue. If the policy/practice unlawfully discriminates, then legal advice should be sought, and it must be discontinued to avoid legal liability. In other circumstances the following may be an appropriate approach to demonstrate the decision was made with due regard to the Public Sector Equality Duty under the Equality Act 2010: + Acknowledge the negative impact and clearly document which distinct groups are impacted; what the negative impacts will be; why mitigation is not possible (e.g. legal, financial, or operational constraints). + Provide evidence-based objective justification – if mitigation is not possible, the policy/practice must be proportionate (benefits should outweigh negative impacts); be necessary (there should be no less discriminatory alternative); be appropriate (the policy/practice should align to the institution’s legitimate aims). + Action plan – this should provide for monitoring of the negative impact over time and provide regular review points to review the impact; provide regular opportunities for engagement with potentially impacted groups to gather feedback and explore emerging alternatives to mitigate the impact; communicate this process transparently with stakeholders and provide appropriate continuing support to those impacted. + Record and publish – senior leaders should be aware and be accountable for implementing the policy/practice (despite negative impacts). The justification and action plan need to be shared with the impacted groups and documented together with a clear audit trail of the EqIA process.

What are some ways of overcoming data collection challenges as part of the EqIA? The research pointed to difficulties around data collection as a core challenge to decision makers engaging effectively with an EqIA. It was felt that institutions often collected incomplete or non-disaggregated data. Equally, there was evidence of inconsistent data collection across institutions and externally and privacy and confidentiality concerns when dealing with small sample sizes. With tight deadlines on carrying out EqIAs, often there was perceived to be over reliance on quantitative data by decision makers as collecting qualitative data was more time consuming and required skilled facilitation and training. The following may be relevant considerations when seeking to overcome some of these data collection challenges as part of an EqIA: + Support for more standardised data collection across departments and encouragement of wider voluntary disclosure by those from distinct groups (such as those aligning with the Equality Act 2010) by transparently emphasising why data is collected, how it will be used, who will have access, anonymity and the importance of collecting such data for promoting inclusive and equitable decision making as well as outlining what changes have been possible as a result of having accurate equality data. + Training and capacity building provided for decision makers on how to gather, triangulate and analyse qualitative and quantitative data (including support on ethical and inclusive practices). + Encouragement of enhanced qualitative data collection through offering multiple ways for stakeholders to participate and compensation for participant engagement. Use existing structures where possible (e.g. staff and student networks) to streamline engagement. + Encouragement for decision makers to analyse data by exploring how overlapping identities affect experience and involvement of those with lived experience in interpreting this data. + Support for decision makers on how to access and triangulate external benchmarking data with internal data. + Support collection disaggregated data where possible and appropriate to develop better understanding of potential nuanced impacts. However, ensure decision makers understand data handling compliance with GDPR.

sharing and monitoringChecklist for EQIA

Internal Sharing + Internally share the EqIA across wider networks + Include both positive and negative impacts and mitigation efforts External Publication (if appropriate) + Consider publishing the EqIA on the institutional website + Ensure alignment with legal/compliance obligations (e.g. GPG Reporting, APP) and existing EDI work (e.g. Athena Swan, REC) Monitoring + Is there a scheduled EqIA monitoring date which is flagged and tracked? + Are there mechanisms to evaluate ongoing or emerging equality impacts? + Are stakeholders involved in the monitoring process + Are the monitoring outcomes recorded and accessible + Is the level of monitoring proportionate to the policy/practice scale and duration?

Sign-Off and Review + Has the EqIA been signed off by the decision maker and any accountable senior manager? + Has any institutional paperwork been completed? Community Engagement + Share EqIA with impacted groups + Communicate positive impacts to relevant groups + Communicate remaining negative impacts and actions to reduce them + Provide justification for continuing with the policy/practice if negative impacts remain Reflection and Learning (EqIA process evaluation) + Lived-Experience Lead, EqIA Working Group, appropriate stakeholders, decision maker reflect on:

• What worked well and what could be improved
• Can any learning be applied to future EqIAs

Champion network and peer support

Actions to meet objective:

• Appoint and empower EqIA champions across the institution to promote and support use.
• Create a peer review group to provide feedback on EqIAs and share best practices.
• Organize clinics offering expert advice and support on EqIAs.

Integrating co-production into EqIAs

Actions to meet objective

• Appoint a Lived Experience Lead or form an EqIA Working Group (who have lived experience of social marginalisation and inequalities) to co-lead EqIA processes alongside decision-makers.
• Involve them at all stages of the EqIA: scoping, data gathering, discussions, impact analysis, planning, and evaluation.
• Clearly define their roles and responsibilities to ensure clarity and recognition.
• Provide appropriate compensation for their contributions.
• Regularly review and adapt their roles through feedback and reflective sessions.

How to ‘action plan’ where an EqIA demonstrates there are negative impacts of a policy/practice which cannot be mitigated? Where an EqIA has identified negative impacts of a policy/practice which cannot be removed or mitigated, consideration usually needs to be given as to whether the policy/practice should continue. If the policy/practice unlawfully discriminates, then legal advice should be sought, and it must be discontinued to avoid legal liability. In other circumstances the following may be an appropriate approach to demonstrate the decision was made with due regard to the Public Sector Equality Duty under the Equality Act 2010: + Acknowledge the negative impact and clearly document which distinct groups are impacted; what the negative impacts will be; why mitigation is not possible (e.g. legal, financial, or operational constraints). + Provide evidence-based objective justification – if mitigation is not possible, the policy/practice must be proportionate (benefits should outweigh negative impacts); be necessary (there should be no less discriminatory alternative); be appropriate (the policy/practice should align to the institution’s legitimate aims). + Action plan – this should provide for monitoring of the negative impact over time and provide regular review points to review the impact; provide regular opportunities for engagement with potentially impacted groups to gather feedback and explore emerging alternatives to mitigate the impact; communicate this process transparently with stakeholders and provide appropriate continuing support to those impacted. + Record and publish – senior leaders should be aware and be accountable for implementing the policy/practice (despite negative impacts). The justification and action plan need to be shared with the impacted groups and documented together with a clear audit trail of the EqIA process.