Contents
- Introduction
- Our commitment
- Our priority areas for 2023
- Summary
- Collecting equality monitoring data
- Indicator 1
- Indicator 2
- Indicator 3
- Indicator 4
- Indicator 5
- Indicator 6
- Indicator 7
- Indicator 8
- Indicator 9
- Appendix: Workforce Race Equality Standard indicators
Introduction
Our Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES) report for 2023 uses 9 specific measures or ‘indicators’. They enable us to compare the experiences of colleagues in ethnic minority groups with those of colleagues in White ethnic groups. We do this so we can develop how we ensure equitable outcomes for all colleagues.
Our Commitment
We publish this report alongside an action plan to be transparent and to show our commitment to providing a fair and inclusive environment for our colleagues from ethnic minority groups.
Our priority areas for 2023
We will prioritise 3 areas of focus for action (see WRES Action Plan) based on data from the Summary and considering the Listening, Learning and Responding to Concerns Report:
- Workstream 1: Increase the representation and progression of colleagues in ethnic minority groups, targeting Executive, Grade A and Grade B, to meet at least the economically active ethnic minority representation levels.
- Workstream 2: Increase the number of people from ethnic minority groups who are appointed from shortlisting internally, at interview and appointment stages.
- Workstream 3: Improve feelings of inclusion and psychological safety among colleagues from ethnic minority groups.
Tyson Hepple, Executive Director of Operations and Race Equality Network Executive Sponsor
“I am very proud to have taken over as Executive Sponsor for the Race Equality Network. I would particularly like to pay tribute to the co-chairs and the wider membership of the REN for all the effort they have put into ensuring that race equality remains such an important issue in CQC. This is particularly important given the publication of the Listening, Learning and Responding to Concerns Review in March this year.
"This report shows that we are making some progress, but there is clearly more we need to do, particularly in relation to recruitment, reports of discrimination and career progression. I look forward to working with the network over the next 12 months as we continue to move this important agenda forward.”
Blessing Hale, Race Equality Network Chair
“The Race Equality Network continues to champion equitable recruitment opportunities for all colleagues from an ethnic minority background, creating and fostering an inclusive culture that does not discriminate. It does this by equipping and empowering the network members to enable them to excel during recruitment campaigns and throughout their career in CQC. Working closely with the People Committee, we are committed to creating a workplace where we can all bring our best selves, and be proud to be a valued colleague at CQC.”
Summary
Representation
The area of focus is on developing our talent pipeline for Executive grades and ensuring equitable representation at grades below this. This is based on the following points:
- There has been minor improvement to the overall representation figure, from 13.8% in 2022 to 14.5% in 2023 (an increase of 7 staff). It means that as of 31 March 2023, we have 427 colleagues from ethnic minority groups out of 2,952 staff overall, being mindful of diversity information sharing rates.
- The largest increase was at Grade C (up 3.9%). Grade A, the pipeline grade to Executive grades, has the lowest ethnic minority representation (11%).
- Grades C and E continue to have the highest representation levels for colleagues from an ethnic minority background. This is 17-22% compared with the overall ethnic minority representation of 14.5%.
Recruitment and equitable experiences
The area of focus is on increasing appointment from shortlisting, including from our internal talent, which supports representation figures and retention. This is based on the following points:
- People from ethnic minority backgrounds continue to be less likely to be appointed compared with counterparts from White ethnic groups.
- Colleagues from an ethnic minority background are less likely to believe that we provide equal opportunities for career progression or promotion compared with colleagues from White ethnic groups. The figure from respondents has decreased since the last survey in 2021 when we asked this question.
Inclusion
The area of focus aligns to the Listening, Learning and Responding to Concerns (LLRC) finding, so that we improve the experience of our staff around inclusion, psychological safety and belonging.
- Colleagues from an ethnic minority background are more likely to say they experience discriminatory behaviour compared with colleagues from White ethnic groups.
Collecting equality monitoring data
CQC uses people data to develop this report.
This consists of Electronic Staff Record (ESR) data. The following table contains ESR data and shows the total number of people employed in the organisation as at 31 March 2023 and those that have self-reported their race/ethnicity using ESR.*
| Total number of colleagues as at 31 March 2023 | 2,952 |
|---|---|
| Proportion of colleagues from an ethnic minority background employed in the organisation | 14.5% (427) |
| The proportion of total colleagues who have self-reported their ethnicity | 92.6% |
* This does not include the Board representation – see indicator 9.
- The overall proportion of colleagues from an ethnic minority background has increased from 13.8% to 14.5%. The total count has increased by 7 to 427.
- The proportion of total colleagues who have self-reported their ethnicity has increased from 91.4% in 2022 to 92.6% in 2023.
The report also compares people data from our Pulse Survey in May 2023 with our 2021 People Survey.
| Respondents | May Pulse Survey 2023 - count | May Pulse Survey 2023 - % of total | November/December People Survey 2021 - count | November/December People Survey 2021 - % of total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ethnic minority background | 224 | 10.6% | 182 | 8.3% |
| White | 1,651 | 78% | 1,727 | 78.3% |
| Prefer not to say | 241 | 11.4% | 297 | 13.5% |
| Total | 2,116 | 100% | 2,206 | 100% |
Indicator 1
Indicator 1 requires that we report the percentage of colleagues in each of the Agenda for Change (AfC) Bands and Very Senior Managers (VSM), which include Executive Board members.
CQC’s pay and grading framework is not always directly comparable with the Agenda for Change (AfC) bands from the NHS. However, for the purpose of comparison, broad equivalents between the 2 are provided in the following table.
| Category | White | vs 2022 | Ethnic minority | vs 2022 | Not stated | vs 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Executive grades (VSM, B9, B8d) | 80.6% | -1.1% | 13.2% | +3.3% | 6.2% | -2.2% |
| Grade A (B8b, B8c) | 81.4% | +0.7% | 11% | +0.8% | 7.6% | -1.5% |
| Grade B (B8a) | 78.7% | +0.3% | 14.2% | +0.9% | 7.1% | -1.2% |
| Grade C (B7) | 71.8% | -3.3% | 22.2% | +3.9% | 6% | -0.6% |
| Grade D (B6) | 76.5% | +4.4% | 17.2% | -1.6% | 6.4% | -2.7% |
| Grade E (B5) | 76.6% | +4.1% | 14.1% | -3.0% | 9.4% | -1.0% |
| Grade F (B4) | 78.8% | +0.6% | 12.7% | -0.1% | 8.5% | -0.5% |
| Other | 55.2% | +5.2% | 31% | +2.4% | 13.8% | -7.6% |
| Overall total | 78.2% | +0.6% | 14.5% | +0.7% | 7.3% | -1.3% |
Data as at 31 March 2023. Comparable AfC bands are shown in brackets.
What our is data telling us:
- There has been a minor improvement to the overall representation figure, up from 13.8% in 2022 to 14.5% in 2023.
- At individual grade level, year-on-year movement is mostly minor. The largest increase in ethnic minority representation was in Grade C (up 3.9%) and Executive (up 3.3%). Minor decreases are seen in Grades E (down 3%), D (down 1.6%), and F (down 0.1%).
- Grades C and D continue to have the highest representation levels (17 to 22%) compared with the overall ethnic minority representation figure (14.5%). Executive Grades are slightly below this figure, while colleagues in ethnic minority groups are now least represented at Grade A level (11%).
Indicator 2
Indicator 2 requires that we calculate the relative likelihood of people from ethnic minority backgrounds being appointed from shortlisting compared with candidates in White ethnic groups for all CQC posts.
| Category | White 2023* | Ethnic minority 2023* | White 2022* | Ethnic minority 2022* |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number shortlisted | 2,085 | 755 | 1,725 | 501 |
| Number appointed | 724 | 157 | 572 | 117 |
| Relative likelihood of shortlisting/ appointed | 0.347 | 0.208 | 0.332 | 0.234 |
Relative likelihood of candidates from White ethnic groups being appointed from shortlisting compared with candidates from ethnic minority groups:
- 2023*: 1.670
- 2022*: 1.420
*2023 data covers period 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023; 2022 data covers period 1 April 2021 to 31 March 2022.
What our data is telling us:
- Applicants from White ethnic groups remain more likely to be appointed than candidates from an ethnic minority background.
- The relative likelihood figure has declined since 2022, although there is an increase in both the number and proportion of applicants from an ethnic minority background.
- Of the shortlisted candidates, 26% were from an ethnic minority background, 72% were in the White ethnic group, and 2% did not provide this information. Compared with the previous year, the figure for candidates from an ethnic minority background was up by 4 percentage points, and down by the same amount for candidates in the White ethnic group.
- Of the candidates that were appointed, 18% were from an ethnic minority background (up 1 percentage point on 2022), 81% were from a White ethnic group (no change), and 1% did not provide this information (down 1 percentage point).
Indicator 3
Indicator 3 requires that we calculate the relative likelihood of colleagues in ethnic minority groups entering the formal disciplinary process compared with colleagues in White ethnic groups. This indicator is based on a 2-year rolling average.
| Category | White 2023* | Ethnic minority 2023* | White 2022* | Ethnic minority 2022* |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of colleagues in workforce | 2,338.5 | 423.5 | 2,408.5 | 429 |
| Number of colleagues entering the formal disciplinary process | 9.5 | 2 | 7.5 | 3 |
| Likelihood entering the formal disciplinary process | 0.0040 | 0.0047 | 0.0031 | 0.0070 |
Relative likelihood of colleagues from an ethnic minority group entering process compared with colleagues in a White ethnic group:
- 2023*: 1.175
- 2022*: 2.245
*Data is based on a 2-year rolling average of the reporting year (1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023) and the previous year (1 April 2021 to 31 March 2022).
**The 2022 data covers the period 1 April 2020 to 31 March 2022.
What our data is telling us:
- There is no significant difference between colleagues from an ethnic minority background and colleagues from a White ethnic group entering the formal disciplinary process.
- During the reporting year (2022/23), there were no cases involving colleagues from an ethnic minority background. This was a reduction of 4 in 2021/22. Averaged over 2 years, this is a total of 2 cases.
- The number of cases involving colleagues in White ethnic groups also reduced in this period from 11 to 8.
- The effect of these in-year decreases is a reduction in the relative likelihood figure into the 'non-adverse' range, meaning there is no significant difference between the ethnic groups.
Indicator 4
Indicator 4 requires that we calculate the relative likelihood of colleagues in White ethnic groups accessing non-mandatory learning and continuing professional development (CPD) compared with colleagues in ethnic minority groups.
CQC has 2 types of learning routes:
Route 1: All colleagues can access a large number of learning resources (on and offline) on demand through our learning management system, Education and Development (ED).
Route 2: Any colleague requiring specific learning interventions that are not available through the learning management system (on or offline), does this through an application process, which is reviewed by a panel and either approved, declined or deferred. This is an Individual Funded Learning Application (IFLA). The numbers for Route 2 in the following table are those who have accessed the process rather than the outcome of the applications.
The data is based on the number of records during the timeframe (1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023), compared with an average of the workforce numbers as at 31 March 2022 and 31 March 2023, to reflect the timeframe in question. This data is likely to include those that are no longer employed by the organisation. For Route 1, it is therefore possible that the number of colleagues accessing training is higher than the number of colleagues in the organisation.
Route 1
| Category | White 2023* | Ethnic minority 2023* | White 2022* | Ethnic minority 2022* |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of colleagues in workforce (average) | 2,390 | 427 | 2,408.5 | 429 |
| Number of colleagues accessing non-mandatory training and CPD | 2,337 | 444 | 2,441 | 423 |
| Likelihood accessing non-mandatory training and CPD | 0.978 | 1.040 | 1.013 | 0.986 |
Relative likelihood of colleagues in White ethnic groups accessing non-mandatory training and CPD compared with colleagues from an ethnic minority background:
- 2023*: 0.940
- 2022*: 1.028
*2023 data covers period 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023; 2022 data covers period 1 April 2021 to 31 March 2022.
What our data is telling us:
- There is no significant difference between colleagues in White ethnic groups and colleagues from an ethnic minority background in accessing non-mandatory training through our learning management system.
- Almost all colleagues have accessed non-mandatory training that was recorded on ED. This year’s data suggests that colleagues from an ethnic minority background are slightly more likely to access non-mandatory training than colleagues in White ethnic groups.
- A reduction in the overall number of staff in White ethnic groups accessing training, combined with little change to the number in ethnic minority groups has resulted in a minor change to the overall likelihood figure.
Route 2
| Category | White 2023* | Ethnic minority 2023* | White 2022* | Ethnic minority 2022* |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of colleagues in workforce (average) | 2,390 | 427 | 2,408.5 | 429 |
| Number of colleagues accessing the IFLA process | 82 | 12 | 77 | 17 |
| Likelihood of accessing the IFLA process | 0.0343 | 0.0281 | 0.0320 | 0.0396 |
Relative likelihood of colleagues in White ethnic group accessing the IFLA process compared with colleagues from an ethnic minority background:
- 2023*: 1.221
- 2022*: 0.807
*2023 data covers period 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023; 2022 data covers period 1 April 2021 to 31 March 2022.
What our data is telling us:
- There is no significant difference between colleagues in White ethnic groups and colleagues from an ethnic minority background accessing the IFLA process.
- This year’s data suggests that colleagues in White ethnic groups were slightly more likely to access IFLA process than colleagues from an ethnic minority background.
- There were 5 fewer requests from colleagues from an ethnic minority background (12 compared with 17) this year, and 5 more requests from staff in White ethnic groups (82 compared with 77), resulting in a decline in the indicator.
- The proportion of requests that were successful is broadly the same (94% for colleagues in White ethnic groups, 92% for colleagues from an ethnic minority background).
- It is worth noting that no requests from colleagues from an ethnic minority background were rejected this year, a reduction of 2 from the previous year.
Indicator 5
Indicator 5 concerns the percentage of colleagues experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse from patients, relatives or the public in the last 12 months. This indicator uses data from our May 2023 Pulse Survey.
Our 2023 Pulse Survey question is slightly different to the one used in the NHS staff survey: "In the last 12 months, I have experienced harassment, bullying or abuse at work from people other than CQC colleagues".
| Question text: May 2023 Pulse Survey | Ethnic minority 2023 | vs 2021 | White 2023 | vs 2021 | Difference (between ethnic minority and White groups) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| In the last 12 months, I have experienced harassment, bullying or abuse at work from people other than CQC colleagues (for example, members of the public and people who use services) | 9.8% | +4.3 | 11.2% | +2.5% | 1.4% |
Comparison is with our 2021 People Survey (November/December 2021).
What our data is telling us:
- Respondents from an ethnic minority background are less likely to experience harassment, bullying or abuse at work from others external to CQC compared with colleagues in White ethnic groups.
- Both scores have increased since the last survey in autumn 2021 when this question was asked.
- The result for colleagues in ethnic minority groups saw a higher increase (up by 4 percentage points) and remains below the comparator for White groups.
Indicator 6
Indicator 6 concerns the percentage of colleagues experiencing bullying, harassment or abuse from other colleagues in the last 12 months. This indicator uses data from our May 2023 Pulse Survey.
| Question text: May 2023 Pulse Survey | Ethnic minority 2023 | vs 2021 | White 2023 | vs 2021 | Difference (between ethnic minority and White groups) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| In the last 12 months, I have experienced bullying, harassment or abuse from other CQC colleagues | 11.2% | +4.1 | 12.1% | +4.3 | 0.9% |
Comparison is with our 2021 People Survey (November/December 2021).
What our data is telling us:
- Respondents from an ethnic minority background are slightly less likely to experience bullying, harassment or abuse from colleagues compared with colleagues in White ethnic groups.
- Both scores have increased since the last survey in autumn 2021 when we asked this question.
- Both groups saw a similar size increase (of 4 percentage points). The result for the White ethnic group remains above that of respondents from an ethnic minority background.
Indicator 7
Indicator 7 concerns the percentage of colleagues believing that we provide equal opportunities for career progression or promotion. This indicator uses data from our May 2023 Pulse Survey.
| Question text: May 2023 Pulse Survey | Ethnic minority 2023 | vs 2021 | White 2023 | vs 2021 | Difference (between ethnic minority and White groups) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I believe we provide equal opportunities for career progression or promotion | 33% | -6.4 | 38.3% | -16.0 | 5.3% |
Comparison is with our 2021 People Survey (November/December 2021).
What our data is telling us:
- Respondents from an ethnic minority background are less likely to believe that CQC provides equal opportunities for career progression or promotion than respondents in White ethnic groups.
- Both scores have worsened since the last survey in autumn 2021 when we asked this question.
- The comparator for the White ethnic group is now at its lowest point (38.3%) following a 16-percentage point decrease. However, it does remain 5% higher than the score for respondents from an ethnic minority background.
Indicator 8
Indicator 8 concerns the percentage of colleagues who have personally experienced discrimination at work from any of the following: manager/team leader or other colleagues (in the last 12 months). This indicator uses data from our May 2023 Pulse Survey. Please see the table below.
| Question text: May 2023 Pulse Survey | Ethnic minority 2023 | vs 2021 | White 2023 | vs 2021 | Difference (between ethnic minority and White groups) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| In the last 12 months, I have personally experienced discrimination at work from any of the following: my manager, team leader or other colleagues | 13.4% | +9.0 | 6.1% | +2.4 | 7.3% |
Comparison is with our 2021 People Survey (November/December 2021).
What our data is telling us:
- Respondents from an ethnic minority background are more likely to experience this behaviour than respondents in White ethnic groups.
- Both scores have worsened since the last survey in autumn 2021.
- A large increase is seen in the result for the ethnic minority group against the previous survey, with the figure trebling from 4.4% to 13.4%.
- The figure for the White ethnic group of 6.1% represents a 2.4% increase, but the latest figure is less than half that of respondents from an ethnic minority background.
Indicator 9
Indicator 9 looks at the representation of people from ethnic minority backgrounds at the Board compared with representation of people from ethnic minority backgrounds in our workforce.
| Category | White | Ethnic minority | Not stated |
|---|---|---|---|
| (i) Non-Executive membership | 62.5% | 12.5% | 25% |
| (ii) Executive membership | 100% | 0% | 0% |
| Overall Board membership | 72.7% | 9.1% | 18.2% |
| Overall workforce | 77.9% | 15% | 7.1% |
Data as at November 2023.
What our data is telling us:
- Between 31 March and 30 November 2023, Board membership increased to 11 voting members.
- The overall representation figure is 9.1% (down from 31 March figure of 14.5% when Board membership was 9 voting members).
- To reflect the increase in Non-Executive membership and address the shortfall in self-reporting personal information due to no access to ESR, we have used data snapshot for race/ethnicity status as at 30 November 2023.
Appendix: Workforce Race Equality Standard indicators (developed by the NHS)
Workforce indicators
For each of these 4 workforce indicators, compare the data for staff in White ethnic groups and staff from an ethnic minority background.
1. Percentage of staff in each of the AfC (Agenda for Change) Bands 1-9 and VSM (very senior managers, including executive Board members) compared with the percentage of staff in the overall workforce.
Note: Undertake this calculation separately for non-clinical and for clinical staff.
2. Relative likelihood of staff being appointed from shortlisting across all posts.
3. Relative likelihood of staff entering the formal disciplinary process, as measured by entry into a formal disciplinary investigation.
Note: This indicator will be based on data from a two-year rolling average of the current year and the previous year.
4. Relative likelihood of staff accessing non-mandatory training and Continuous Professional Development.
People/Pulse Survey indicators
For each of the four staff survey indicators, compare the outcomes of the responses for staff in White ethnic groups and staff from an ethnic minority background.
5. Percentage of staff experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse from patients, relatives or the public in last 12 months.
6. Percentage of staff experiencing harassment, bullying or abuse from staff in last 12 months.
7. Percentage believing that trust provides equal opportunities for career progression or promotion.
8. In the last 12 months have you personally experienced discrimination at work from any of the following? Manager/team leader or other colleagues.
Board representation indicator
For this indicator, compare the difference for staff in White ethnic groups and staff from an ethnic minority background.
9. Percentage difference between the Board voting membership and the overall workforce.
Note: Only voting members of the Board should be included when considering this indicator.