Introduction
BPAS is the UK's leading abortion care charity, providing safe, confidential, high-quality abortion treatment for more than 55 years. We also provide contraception, STI testing and vasectomy services, and 98% of the women we see have their abortion treatment paid for by the NHS (or other government departments). This report fulfils our obligation to the NHS bodies that commission our services under NHS Standard Contracts.
As a healthcare provider bound by the NHS standard contract, BPAS is required to report annually on key equality metrics as part of the Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES) and Workforce Disability Equality Standard (WDES). This report and accompanying action plan fulfil our obligations in this regard.
BPAS is committed to a policy of equal opportunity and welcomes applicants from all sections of the community as we recognise the value that a diverse workforce brings.
Work following the previous year’s reporting, has seen BPAS appoint a Director of Client Experience, who is responsible for ensuring and facilitating fairness towards equality and diversity for BPAS employees and clients.
BPAS will continue to encourage data capture and reporting through the recruitment process and utilising the full offering of the HR self-service system.
BPAS will issue the annual employee survey in 2022, which will be adapted to include a more diverse list of equality questions, to help direct positive change.
To enhance BPAS’ commitment to inclusivity for individuals or groups who are more susceptible to inequality, BPAS will build a Workforce Equality Group, made up of self-nominated stakeholders with a personal interest in ensuring a fair, equal and consistent approach towards change within BPAS.
Data drawn from BPAS’ HR system, recruitment monitoring systems and annual employee survey was used to populate the 2022 WRES and WDES reports. Several of the required metrics could not be meaningfully reported upon due to the small number of BME (Black and Minority Ethnic) or disabled employees within the current workforce.
As of June 2022, the proportion of BME employees within the workforce was 7%, representing a 1% decrease since 2021. There were 1% more BME employees working in non-clinical roles compared to clinical roles. The ethnicity of a high proportion of employees was still unknown (50%). The representation of BME at an executive and board level (8%) is similar to that found within the overall workforce.
In terms of Disability, 2% of the workforce were recorded as having a disability. This is the same proportion across both non-clinical and clinical roles. Representation of disabled members at executive and board level is lower than that found in the overall workforce, with no individuals working at that level declaring a disability.
There appears to be some inequality in the recruitment shortlisting of both BME and disabled candidates, with proportionately fewer BME and disabled candidates being appointed into job roles from shortlisting compared to white and non-disabled candidates.
The accompanying action plan highlights key actions that BPAS will undertake in response to these findings.
Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES) Metrics
Workforce Ethnic Groupings (Indicators 1 & 9)
| White | BAM | Ethnicity not known | White | BAM | Ethnicity not known | ||
| Clinical Staff | 37% | 7% | 56% | Executive Leadership | 92% | 8% | 0% |
| Non Clinical Staff | 48% | 8% | 44% | Board | 83% | 8.5% | 8.5% |
| Total | 43% | 7% | 50% | Totol | 88%* | 8%* | 4%* |
*Care should be taken when interpreting this data as the percentage are calculated from the small population (n=25).
% of candidates appointed from shortlisitng
Recruitment (Indicator 2)
| Relative likelihood of white candidates being appointed from shortlisting compared to BME candidates | 1.41* |
*A figure below one would indicate that white candidates are less likely than BME candidates to be appointed from shortlisting. A figure over one would indicate that BME candidates are less likely than white candidates to be appointed from shortlisting.
Disciplinary Action (Indicator 3)
| Relative likelihood of BME staff entering the formal disciplinary process compared to white staff | 0* |
*A figure below one would indicate that BME staff members are less likely than white staff to enter the formal disciplinary process. This data is reported with caution due to the low number of employees involved in disciplinary proceedings.
Non- Mandatory Training and CPD (Indicator 4)
Care should be taken when interpreting these results due to the small self- reported BME respondent size (n = 36). We have taken the decision to publish these findings in the interest of transparency and as a reflection of our commitment to improving workplace equality.
This data has been collated from the 2021 Employee Survey, in which the following questions were asked:
In the last 12 months, have you experienced:
- harassment at work from clients, service users or other members of the public?
- harassment at work from managers or other colleagues?
- bullying at work from clients, service users or other members of the public?
- bullying at work from managers or other colleagues?
The following data is taken as the percentage positive response (‘Strongly agree’ and ‘Agree’) from the 2021 Employee Survey.
This data has been taken from the 2021 Employee Survey question: In the last 12 months, have you experienced discrimination at work from managers or other colleagues?
Workforce Disability Equality Standard (WDES) Metrics
Workforce Disability Metrics (1 & 10)
| No Disability | Disability | Not known | No Disability | Disability | Not known | ||
| Clinical Staff | 56% | 2% | 56% | Executive Leadership | 92% | 0% | 8% |
| Non Clinical Staff | 66% | 2% | 32% | Board | 0% | 0% | 100% |
| Total | 61% | 2% | 37% | Totol | 48%* | 0%* | 52%* |
*Care should be taken when interpreting this data as the percentage are calculated from the small population (n=25).
% of candidates appointed from shortlisting
Recruitment (Metric 2)
| Relative likelihood of non-disabled candidates being appointed from shortlisting compared to Disabled candidates | 1.45* |
*A figure below one would indicate that non-disabled candidates are less likely than disabled candidates to be appointed from shortlisting. A figure over one would indicate that disabled candidates are less likely then non-disabled candidates to be appointed from shortlisting.
BPAS will not report on this indicator as no formal capability processes were conducted this year.
Care should be taken when interpreting these results due to the small self- reported disabled respondent size (n = 35). We have taken steps to encourage self-reporting, including regular internal communications prompting employees to regularly update their information.
4a) This data has been collated from the 2021 Employee Survey, in which the following questions were asked:
In the last 12 months, have you experienced:
- harassment at work from clients, service users or other members of the public?
- harassment at work from managers or other colleagues?
- bullying at work from clients, service users or other members of the public?
- bullying at work from managers or other colleagues?
4b) We are unable to report on the percentage of disabled staff compared to non-disabled staff saying that the last time they experienced harassment, bullying or abuse at work, they or a colleague reported it, as this is not a question that was asked in the 2021 Employee Survey.
The following data is taken as the percentage positive response (‘Strongly agree’ and ‘Agree’) from the 2021 Employee Survey:
We are unable to report on the percentage of disabled staff compared to non-disabled staff saying that they have felt pressure from their manager to come to work, despite not feeling well enough to perform their duties, as this is not a question that was asked in the 2021 Employee Survey.
The following data is taken as the percentage positive response (‘Strongly agree’ and ‘Agree’) from the 2021 Employee Survey:
We are unable to report on the percentage of disabled staff saying that their employer has made adequate adjustment(s) to enable them to carry out their work, as this is not a question that was asked in the 2021 Employee Survey.
- The Engagement score has been calculated as the overall average positive response (‘Strongly agree’ and ‘Agree’) of the following 2021 Employee Survey statements:
- I would recommend BPAS as a place to work
- I have no plans to leave BPAS
- I understand how my job contributes to BPAS' objectives
- I look forward to going to work
- I feel like I am part of BPAS' vision for the future
We encourage open discussion between colleagues, management and peers through informal conversation or through the staff forum where specifics points can be put forward for review. BPAS will elevate the opportunity for these types of discussions by the introduction of the Workforce Equality Group, allowing the voices of minority groups to have a direct, positive impact to workforce change.
