Race equality report: section b, Monitoring results

Section b part one – Monitoring Results – Employment

Brookes’ HR database has required substantial improvements and a sustained IT development effort in order for the University to be able to provide reports as required by the RR(A)A,. A phased monitoring approach has been adopted as outlined below:

Phase One

  • Setting up the systems and processes to monitor and report on applications, shortlisted applicants and appointments by racial group at University level, broken down by grade
  • As above, but at School/Directorate level
  • Ethnic origin profile data at University level, also broken down by grade
  • As above, but at School/Directorate level

Completed July 2003

Phase Two

  • Selection and training of the members of recruitment panels
  • Staffing by length of service and part-time/full-time status
  • Disciplinary and capability cases
  • Dismissals and redundancies
  • Early retirement

Expected completion date: December 2003

Phase Three

  • Take up of training and development opportunities
  • Staffing by casual/ fixed term status
  • Internal promotions and progressions

Expected completion date: April 2004

Results of Phase One

Table three indicates the results of phase one of the monitoring process and shows the profile of the University’s staffing as at July 2003. In future, trends and comparisons with earlier years will be made.

Table three - Workforce profile – Aggregated racial groups (July 2003)

Rounded to the nearest percentage % Staff from an ethnic minority racial group1 % Staff identified as ‘White British’, ‘White Irish’ or ‘White other’ Information not known
Support Staff 5% 87% 8%
  As a general trend, people from minority racial groups are more under-represented at higher levels within the University support grades than they are at lower grades
Management People from a minority racial group are significantly under-represented at management levels
Academic/Lecturing staff 5% 84% 11%
  As a general trend, people from minority racial groups are more under-represented at more senior academic levels
Professors People from a minority racial group are significantly under-represented at Professor levels
Researchers Ethnicity data is currently not known for approximately 26% of this group. Data that is held suggests that people from a minority racial group are under-represented at Researcher level.
Manual 8% 74% 18%
University total 5% 85% 10%

Census data for Oxford shows that just under 13% of the city’s population is from an ethnic minority background, 4.9% for Oxfordshire as a whole and just over 9% of the population across England (Census 2001).

1As used by Census 2001; for the purposes of this report, racial groups falling under the category ‘minority racial group’ etc include: Mixed – White and Black Caribbean, Mixed – White and Black African, Mixed – White and Asian, Other Mixed background, Asian or Asian British – Indian, Asian or Asian British – Pakistani, Asian or Asian British – Bangladeshi, Other Asian background, Black or Black British – Caribbean, Black or Black British – African, Other Black background, Chinese, Other ethnic background

Whilst aggregated statistics on ethnic origin are a useful starting point, the University is now required to make analysis by each racial group (as identified in Census 2001) and to assess the impact that policies and procedures are having upon each area of the workforce and student populations.

Comparisons with Census data 2001 cannot be readily made due to the number of ‘not knowns’ within Brookes’ data (racial monitoring data is not held for just over 10% of the current University workforce and this figure is higher within some specific grades).

All staff were asked to complete a new Equal Opportunities monitoring form in September 2003. Over 60% of the forms distributed have now been returned and responses are still coming in. A follow up process is planned for spring 2004, as it is important for the University to minimise the amount of missing data. The University will continue to interrogate its processes over the coming months to review how staff and students at Brookes can be encouraged to declare racial monitoring information. The intention over the next 12 months is therefore to reduce the number of ‘unknown’ cells in the data-set as far as possible. Please refer to section C for timescales and monitoring points for this process.

Although meaningful comparisons are difficult to make from the current data-set, a preliminary assessment has been made of the racial groups that appear to be under-represented so that broad comparisons can be made in subsequent Race Equality reports. Initial analysis by racial group also indicates that , in general terms, the University has the greatest racial diversity amongst employees within lower grade posts. Please refer to Section C for the University’s response to this analysis.

Phase Two and Phase Three – employment monitoring

Some areas for monitoring require significant IT systems development before the data can be captured and reported. Timescales set for completion of the next two phases are set out on pages 5 and 6.

Section b part two – Monitoring results - Recruitment

Data on recruitment information has been collected by racial group since August 2002 (to July 2003). As for section one (workforce data), no benchmarking figures are available against which to compare Brookes’ performance in this area. As set out in the Race Equality Policy, Brookes monitors recruitment data by recording applications, shortlisted applicants and appointments disaggregated by racial group, at the University and School/Directorate levels. Taking the University as a whole:

Applications for posts

For all appointments since August 2002, 61.8% of the applicants have been from a White British, White Irish or White Other racial group, and 17% from an ethnic minority background. 21.2% of those who applied to work at Brookes did not identify their racial group.

Invitation to interview

A slightly higher proportion of people (65.4%) from a White British, White Irish or White Other background were invited to interview. 15.8% were from a minority racial group and 18.8% withheld information relating to their racial origin.

Successful appointments

As above, a slightly higher proportion of people from a White British, White Irish or White Other background were appointed. Of all appointments made at Brookes since August 2002, 67.9% were made to people from a White British, White Irish or White Other background, 15.2% from an ethnic minority background. 16.8% of those appointed withheld information relating to their racial origin.

Progression from application to appointment

Out of those people who identified themselves as from an ethnic minority background who applied for posts at Brookes, 29.6% were shortlisted, 4.9% were appointed.

For those who identified themselves as from a White British, White Irish or White Other ethnic background who applied for jobs at Brookes, 33.7% were shortlisted, and 6.0% were appointed.

These figures are being investigated further, to asses whether the small variations noted at a university wide level are concentrated in any particular workforce group. If any significant differences are found to exist, then explanations for these differences will be identified and action taken to tackle them, in pursuit of our aim of ensuring that the University’s recruitment and selection processes work without an adverse impact on particular racial groups.

Additionally, the University has made note of the racial groups which appear under-represented at application level and has already taken steps to seek an increase in applications from such groups. (Section C provides further information about how the University is responding to this analysis.)

Measuring the impact of policies

As for other areas of monitoring, it has been necessary to operate a phased approach for introducing the monitoring of the University’s policies, so that appropriate systems and processes can be put in place. Table four sets out the timetable for measuring the impact of the various policies in operation across the University. Results of the monitoring of these polices will feature in subsequent reports and will focus on whether particular policies are having a disproportionate impact on people from different racial groups. If any differences are found to exist, then explanations for these differences will be sought and action taken to eliminate the differences.

Table four - time-scale for policy assessment.

Policy Assessment due
Disciplinary policy Phase 2
Grievance policy Phase 2
Harassment policy Phase 2
Re-grading On completion of HERA job evaluation process
Promotions/progressions Phase 3
Dismissals and redundancies Phase 3
Early retirement Phase 2
Identifying other relevant policies/areas of the University for monitoring Assessment made by EODN, Feb 2004

 

Section b part three – Monitoring Results – Students

Table five indicates shows the profile of Brookes’ and student body as at August 2003. In future years trends and comparisons with earlier years will be made.

Table five - Student profile – Aggregated racial groups (August 2003)

Rounded to the nearest percentage % Students from an ethnic minority racial group1 % Students identified as ‘White British’, ‘White Irish’ or ‘White other’ Information not known
All students 22% 70% 8%
Home students (including EEC) 14% 82% 4%
Overseas 49% 33% 18%
State schools 12% 86% 2%

 

As this is the first year that Higher Education institutions have been required to monitor data according to racial group, no sector benchmarking criteria exists. HEFCE2 is currently working with HESA3 to publish useful benchmarking data to enable Higher Education Institutions to be able to make meaningful comparisons next year. Until this data is published it is difficult to assess whether various racial groups at Oxford Brookes University are over or under-represented.

1As used by Census 2001; for the purposes of this report, racial groups falling under the category ‘minority racial group’ etc include: Mixed – White and Black Caribbean, Mixed – White and Black African, Mixed – White and Asian, Other Mixed background, Asian or Asian British – Indian, Asian or Asian British – Pakistani, Asian or Asian British – Bangladeshi, Other Asian background, Black or Black British – Caribbean, Black or Black British – African, Other Black background, Chinese, Other ethnic background

2The Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) distributes public money for teaching and research to universities and colleges.

3HESA is now the central source for higher education statistics and has standardised and streamlined the data collection and publication process to become a respected point of reference.

This report is divided into the following sections

  1. Update on EOD strategy and progress against key objectives
  2. Monitoring results
  3. Update on the University’s race equality policy and objectives as set out within the race equality action plan
  4. Summary
Equal opportunities and diversity