Equality Impact Assessment - Adult Safeguarding

• Home
• Your Council
• Equalities
• Equality Impact Assessments
• Equality Impact Assessment - Community Services
• Equality Impact Assessment - Adult Safeguarding

Is this a new function or a review of an existing function?

The legal duty of care that underpins this function was created by the National Assistance Act 1948. It was further defined by a ministerial order based on the Social Services Act (1970), the No Secrets review in (2000) and the ADASS guidance in 2005. All local authorities started to review adult safeguarding in response to a series of inspections reports by the Commission for Social Care Inspection (now the Care Quality Commission).

The borough started to reinforce its Adult Safeguarding function in 2007.

What are the aims/purpose of the function?

• To lead a multi agency response to the abuse of adults who may be eligible for community care services and were the alleged incident took place with the borough.
• To ensure allegations of abuse are investigated and to work in collaboration with adults who are eligible for community care service who are subject to abuse as defined in No Secrets (2000).
• To learn from trends within the referrals it receives in order to and change practice to reduce the prevalence of abuse.

Is the function designed to meet specific needs such as the needs of minority ethnic groups, older people, disabled people etc?

The service is designed to meet the needs of all adults of 18 years or more who may be eligible for community care services who are resident, or subject to abuse in the borough.

What information has been gathered on this function? (Indicate the type of information gathered e.g. statistics, consultation, other monitoring information)? Attach a summary or refer to where the evidence can be found.

The profile of the people living in the borough is detailed in the following summary which is based on:

• Data held by the Council’s Human Resources Department on Community Care Services members of staff (last updated in September 2008);
• Data from the 2001 Census;
• Data from the 2007 Round Greater London Assembly (GLA) Population Projections; and
• Data from the Borough Profile 2008 (based on 2007 Round GLA Projection data) which is produced and distributed by the Council. This Profile was last updated in November 2008 and is a collaborative project which utilises data held by the Council, Kingston Primary Care Trust, the Metropolitan Police and other partners.
• Gender and Age:

The 2001 Census measured the Borough population at 147,273, with females making up 51.12% of the population. The following characteristics were reported in ‘Kingston Census 2001’:

• 16-24 year olds comprise 12.8% of the Borough’s population.
• Higher percentages of this group are found in the student population located in the Kingston Hill, Clayhill and Portmouth Road residences.
• 25-44 year olds account for 33.2% of the Borough’s population.
• Higher percentages of this age group are located in the Kingston and Surbiton town centers.
• 65+ year olds constitute 13.4% of the Borough’s population.
• The retired population of the Borough live in areas away from the Borough’s town centers.
• The highest proportion of retired persons, 57.1% is located in Berrylands ward, parts of the area characterized by sheltered accommodation and nursing homes.

Using the 2001 Census total population figure of 147,273, Kingston has the smallest population of any London borough (excluding the City of London). This places Kingston as the 27th most densely populated local authority in the country (out of 375). Following a minor dip between 1992 and 1994 the Borough‘s population has risen steadily from 134,280 in 1981 to almost 158,000 in 2007 (source: Borough Profile 2008).

1.1 Population Projections (source: Borough Profile 2008 pp 6-9):

• n the 2001-2007 period there was an increase in total population of 6.9% in the Borough. This was a significantly higher rate of increase than outer London (2.10%), Greater London (3.2%) and England (3.3%).
• The overall increase in total Borough population is projected to be 3% in the period 2006-2011.
• The projected subsequent rise between the years 2011-2026 is a further 6.9%.
• Beyond 2006, the Borough‘s population will rise at the same rate as that of outer London but behind the rate of Greater London.
• Although the period saw an increase in population due to natural change (more births than deaths) it is believed that between 2000 and 2006 there was a net loss of population due to migration.
• The only age range that showed an increase in population was the 16-29 age bracket.
• Ethnicity:

The 2001 Census measured the Borough population at 147, 273, with 84.46% of residents reporting themselves to be White British, White Irish or White Other. The following characteristics were reported in ‘Kingston Census 2001’:

• The Borough’s Indian residents make up 3.6% of the total population.
• The main concentration of this ethnic group is around the area north of New Malden.
• 1.6% of the population comprise residents of black origin. The main concentration is the Norbiton area of the Borough.
• Areas of Beverley and Chessington North and Hook wards have 10% of their population within the black ethnic group.
• 5.1% of the Borough’s population come from the ethnic groups classed as Other Asian and Other Chinese. The assumption is that these groups comprise mainly the Korean population.
• The main concentration of this community is in the New Malden area.
• The highest proportion is located in the area south of New Malden town centre in St. James ward with over 25% of the residents within this ethnic group.

In 2001, the proportion of residents in ethnic groups other than white in Kingston was 16%. This figure is lower than the Greater London average (29%) but higher than the figure for England (9%). The largest sub group in the Borough other than the white groups is people of Indian origins (3.61%) followed closely by Other Asian (3.56%) and Other (3.18%). St James, Coombe Hill and Coombe Vale wards have the highest ethnic minority populations in the Borough with rates in excess of 20%. The largest minority ethnic groups in the Borough are Tamils and Koreans. The Korean population in New Malden is estimated to be the largest in Europe (source: Borough Profile 2008).

2.1 Population Projections (source: Borough Profile 2008 pp 14-16):

• For the period 2001-2026 indicate a rise in the ethnic minority populations in both Kingston and Greater London. The total minority ethnic population in Kingston in 2026 is predicted to be 29% (up from 16% in 2001). In Greater London the figure in 2026 is estimated to be 39% (from 29% in 2001).
• Population projections indicate a gradual rise in numbers of all ethnic minority groups between 2001-2026. A significant rise is the population of ‘Other‘ ethnic groups which is forecast to rise from 3.18% of the total population to 10.25%.
• Disability:

There was no specific question in the 2001 Census related to disability however, residents were requested to self-report ‘limiting long-term illness’. The following characteristics were reported in the ‘Kingston Census 2001’:

• 12.9% of all persons have a ‘limiting long-term illness’.
• 5.7% of all persons or working age have a ‘limiting long-term illness’.
• There is an even distribution throughout the Borough.
• Higher concentrations equate to the location of residential and nursing homes and areas with sheltered accommodation.

Population Projections:

The GLA Population Projection data does not include religion.

Religion:

Religious belief was an optional question in 2001 Census which impacts upon the integrity of the data collected. The following is noted:

• 64.58% of residents reported themselves to have Christian religious beliefs.

The next highest percentages were 3.92% Muslim and 3.63% Hindu.

• 17.99% of residents reported that they had no religious beliefs.
• 7.38% did not state any religious belief.

Population Projections:

The GLA Population Projection data does not include religion.

• Sexual Orientation:

The 2001 Census did not collect data on sexual orientation therefore there is no aggregated information available on the sexual orientation of Borough residents.

The 2001 census identifies 312 people in same sex relationships living in the borough and there have been 98 Civil Partnerships registered since December 2005. National data indicates that between 7-10% of the population belong to LGB group.

The boroughs existing data is based on the current Department of Health data set. The following extract from the services performance data demonstrates that the audience engaged is not reflective of the boroughs population.

Numbers of referral by gender from April 2009 to February 2010 from a total of 491.

Numbers of referral by ethnicity from April 2009 to February 2010 from a total of 491.

Does your analysis of the information show different outcomes for different groups (higher or lower uptake/failure to access/receive a poorer or inferior service)? If yes, indicate which groups and which aspects of the policy or function contribute to inequality?

We are not currently able to identify outcomes for service user’s carers and perpetrators.

We have commissioned Kingston University to develop a systematic audit tool which will generate a data set that we will be able to use to identify differential outcomes. The audit tool will be in use by December 2010. We will then be able to develop specific plans in the Service User, Marketing and Quality Assurance sub groups of the Adult Safeguarding Board established in March 2010.

Are these differences justified (e.g. are there legislative or other constraints)? If they are, explain in what way.

Although there are clear differences between the outcome data received to date and the population within the borough we cannot draw any conclusions until we have clear outcome data.

What action needs to be taken as a result of this Equality Impact Assessment to address any detrimental impacts or meet previously unidentified need? Include here any reasonable adjustments for access by disabled people. Include dates by which action will be taken. Attach an action plan if necessary.

We have

•Restructured the Adult Safeguarding Board and made specific sub groups responsible for developing actions plans to meet shortcomings in service delivery

•The Marketing and Promotion Group will be responsible for developing a rolling campaign which seeks to engage people from all six equality strands, age, gender, disability, race, sexual orientation and religion or belief.

•Commissioned Kingston University to develop an outcome measurement tool. We will ask them to include a question in relation to all six equality strands, age, gender, disability, race, sexual orientation and religion or belief

In order to improve the monthly data collection and establish a robust baseline set of information

•Redraft the Adult Safeguarding Alert form to include data collection for all six equality strands, age, gender, disability, race, sexual orientation and religion or belief

•Amend the monthly Adult Safeguarding Performance Report to illustrate referrals from for all six equality strands, age, gender, disability, race, sexual orientation and religion or belief.

When will you evaluate the impact of action taken? Give review dates.

The progress towards achieving these goals will be reviewed by the Adult Safeguarding board in June, September and December of this year.

Assessment completed by:

NAME           Joseph Carmody

SERVICE      Adult Safeguarding Team

DATE            04.05.2010