Equality Delivery System (EDS2)
The Equality Delivery System (EDS) is a mandatory NHS England standard that requires NHS organisations to show how they are improving outcomes for people who share protected characteristics as defined by the Equality Act 2010.
Equality and Diversity is all about people, and how we can level uneven playing fields to provide everybody the opportunity to thrive, succeed and feel respected and valued whatever their background, culture or characteristics.
The EDS has four performance objectives / goals:
- Better Health Outcomes for all
- Improved patient access & experience
- Empowered, engaged & wells supported staff
- Inclusive leadership at all levels.
Hull CCG implemented the first version of the EDS in 2012, which informed its Equality and Diversity Objectives and Action Plan. This has led to a number of improvements, including stronger and more collaborative engagement with more diverse groups, strengthening of equality impact assessment processes, and a focus on access and inclusion in health services.
Good practice on equality is seen as the mark of a well-led organisation. Hull CCG understands how important leadership is to promoting equality throughout the organisation and in all its activities and functions. Both the executive and lay member lead have endorsed the EDS, providing strong direction and leadership in the implementation of EDS2. In addition, a Board Development Session was held to discuss the equalities and the EDS and to review Goal 4 relating to inclusive leadership.
Engagement with local interest groups and CCG staff
Hull CCG has taken a comprehensive approach to gathering evidence for the EDS, reviewing how we commission services against EDS outcomes. An evidence-gathering workshop was held with senior commissioning managers to get a collect and discuss the available evidence. This included previous engagement that related to access and experience (e.g. through the People’s Panel).
In addition, extensive engagement was done with a number of voluntary and community groups, whose members represented the protected characteristics. This included a series of focus groups with local community groups, which provided rich qualitative evidence. In addition, an on-line questionnaire was widely distributed via the voluntary and community sector.
Grading was done through a series of focus groups including staff and a diverse range of local interest groups.