Equality impact assessment (EIA) form: evidencing paying due regard to protected characteristics
(Form updated October 2023)
Future of Scarborough Model Agreement
|
If you would like this information in another language or format such as Braille, large print or audio, please contact the Communications Unit on 01609 53 2013 or email communications@northyorks.gov.uk.
|
|
Equality Impact Assessments (EIAs) are public documents. EIAs accompanying reports going to County Councillors for decisions are published with the committee papers on our website and are available in hard copy at the relevant meeting. To help people to find completed EIAs we also publish them in the Equality and Diversity section of our website. This will help people to see for themselves how we have paid due regard in order to meet statutory requirements.
|
Name of Directorate and Service Area |
Parks and Grounds
|
|
Lead Officer and contact details |
Jonathan Clubb – Head of Parks & Grounds
|
|
Names and roles of other people involved in carrying out the EIA |
|
|
How will you pay due regard? e.g., working group, individual officer |
Individual officer with advice from cross council professional teams.
|
|
When did the due regard process start? |
September 2025
|
|
Section 1. Please describe briefly what this EIA is about. (e.g. are you starting a new service, changing how you do something, stopping doing something?)
The proposal summarises current funding arrangements under the Scarborough Model Agreement for town, parish and village councils in relation to environment services in their areas, and makes recommendations to the Executive for proposed changes and the impact to recipients.
|
|
Section 2. Why is this being proposed? What are the aims? What does the authority hope to achieve by it? (e.g., to save money, meet increased demand, do things in a better way.)
The review has identified opportunities to address inconsistent, duplicated or discretionary funding for open space management, verge cutting, public seats, public clocks, public shelters, bus shelters, and administration. This would harmonise services and generate potential savings to NYC.
|
|
Section 3. What will change? What will be different for customers and/or staff?
The outcome of the review is to propose a harmonised approach to how services for open space management, verge cutting, public seats, public clocks, public shelters, bus shelters and administration would be delivered in the Scarborough area. This will mean that local parishes will not receive inconsistent, duplicated or discretionary funding for activities where this is at odds with services in other areas of the County. In some cases, such as for bus shelters, there will be a requirement for NYC to manage these assets.
|
|
Section 4. Involvement and consultation (What involvement and consultation has been done regarding the proposal and what are the results? What consultation will be needed and how will it be done?)
Proposals have been developed through detailed cross service working and engagement with senior elected Members. This has been supplemented with notification to parishes of forthcoming changes to funding arrangements and further communication and engagement with divisional members and parishes before implementation.
|
|
Section 5. What impact will this proposal have on council budgets? Will it be cost neutral, have increased cost or reduce costs?
The proposals will deliver an estimated saving of £102,347 to NYC.
|
|
Section 6. How will this proposal affect people with protected characteristics? |
No impact |
Make things better |
Make things worse |
Why will it have this effect? Provide evidence from engagement, consultation and/or service user data or demographic information etc. |
|
Age |
x |
|
|
|
|
Disability |
x |
|
|
|
|
Sex |
x |
|
|
|
|
Race |
x |
|
|
|
|
Gender reassignment |
x |
|
|
|
|
Sexual orientation |
x |
|
|
|
|
Religion or belief |
x |
|
|
|
|
Pregnancy or maternity |
x |
|
|
|
|
Marriage or civil partnership |
x |
|
|
|
|
Section 7. How will this proposal affect people who… |
No impact |
Make things better |
Make things worse |
Why will it have this effect? Provide evidence from engagement, consultation and/or service user data or demographic information etc. |
|
..live in a rural area? |
|
|
x
|
The SMA is funding delivered to parishes and town councils that are predominantly (although not exclusively) in rural areas. |
|
…have a low income? |
x
|
|
|
|
|
…are carers (unpaid family or friend)?
|
x |
|
|
|
|
….. are from the Armed Forces Community
|
x |
|
|
|
|
Section 8. Geographic impact – Please detail where the impact will be (please tick all that apply) |
|
|
North Yorkshire wide |
|
|
Craven |
|
|
Hambleton |
|
|
Harrogate |
|
|
Richmondshire |
|
|
Ryedale |
|
|
Scarborough |
X
|
|
Selby |
|
|
If you have ticked one or more areas, will specific town(s)/village(s) be particularly impacted? If so, please specify below. |
|
|
|
|
|
Section 9. Will the proposal affect anyone more because of a combination of protected characteristics? (e.g. older women or young gay men) State what you think the effect may be and why, providing evidence from engagement, consultation and/or service user data or demographic information etc.
No.
|
|
Section 10. Next steps to address the anticipated impact. Select one of the following options and explain why this has been chosen. (Remember: we have an anticipatory duty to make reasonable adjustments so that disabled people can access services and work for us) |
Tick option chosen |
|
1. No adverse impact - no major change needed to the proposal. There is no potential for discrimination or adverse impact identified. |
|
|
2. Adverse impact - adjust the proposal - The EIA identifies potential problems or missed opportunities. We will change our proposal to reduce or remove these adverse impacts, or we will achieve our aim in another way which will not make things worse for people. |
|
|
3. Adverse impact - continue the proposal - The EIA identifies potential problems or missed opportunities. We cannot change our proposal to reduce or remove these adverse impacts, nor can we achieve our aim in another way which will not make things worse for people. (There must be compelling reasons for continuing with proposals which will have the most adverse impacts. Get advice from Legal Services) |
X |
|
4. Actual or potential unlawful discrimination - stop and remove the proposal – The EIA identifies actual or potential unlawful discrimination. It must be stopped. |
|
|
Explanation of why option has been chosen. (Include any advice given by Legal Services.)
There is an unknown risk that a reduction in external funding for some environmental services, may lead to service delivery at a lower specification than is currently delivered (e.g. grass cutting). However, it is not certain that this will be the case and parishes will be able to mitigate any reduced funding through reviewing their own precepts.
|
|
|
Section 11. If the proposal is to be implemented how will you find out how it is really affecting people? (How will you monitor and review the changes?)
To undertake a post implementation review 12 months after any changes are made.
|
|
Section 12. Action plan. List any actions you need to take which have been identified in this EIA, including post implementation review to find out how the outcomes have been achieved in practice and what impacts there have actually been on people with protected characteristics. |
||||
|
Action |
Lead |
By when |
Progress |
Monitoring arrangements |
|
Post implementation Review
|
Area Manager – Parks & Grounds |
October 2026 |
|
|
|
Section 13. Summary Summarise the findings of your EIA, including impacts, recommendation in relation to addressing impacts, including any legal advice, and next steps. This summary should be used as part of the report to the decision maker.
The equality impact assessment of the proposals has highlighted that some rural communities may be affected, if implemented. However, the risk that a reduction in external funding for some environmental services, may lead to service delivery at a lower specification, is not certain. Parishes will be able to mitigate any reduced funding by reviewing their own precepts.
A post implementation review 12 months after the decision is made would be prudent to ground truth this assessment.
|
|
Section 14. Sign off section.
This full EIA was completed by:
Name: Job title: Jon Clubb, Head of Parks & Grounds Directorate: Environment Signature: Jon Clubb
Completion date: 30 September 2025
Authorised by relevant Assistant Director (signature): Barrie Mason
Date: 07/10/2025
|