Budget Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) Template 2024/25 – Service Users

The Budget EIA process is a legal duty supporting good financial decision-making. It assesses how proposals may impact on specific groups differently (and whether/how negative impacts can be reduced or avoided) so that these consequences are explicitly considered. Decisions must be informed by accurate, well-informed assessment of likely impacts so that they are fair, transparent, and accountable. Budget EIAs provide a record of this assessment and consideration.

For advice and guidance on completing this assessment contact Emma McDermott, Head of Communities, Equality and Third Sector (CETS).

1. Budget Proposal

Title of budget saving being assessed:	Local Welfare Assistance Schemes
Name and title of officer responsible for this EIA:	Tabitha Cork, Welfare Revenues and Business Support Manager
Directorate and Service Name:	Governance, People and Resources, Welfare Revenues and Business Support
Budget proposal no.	29

Briefly describe the budget saving proposal: (use the wording in the budget spreadsheet and more detail if needed)

Review the funding of welfare support resources to consider the government’s provisional ending/reduction of the Household Support Fund which currently provides all the funding for discretionary awards by this team, namely the Local Discretionary Social Fund and Discretionary Council Tax Reduction. Without a significant discretionary fund to distribute, the remaining welfare resources will concentrate on prevention solutions i.e.. Welfare Advisory work, working in collaboration with other directorates and CVS partners.

Summarise the most significant impacts identified by this assessment including which groups will be disproportionally negatively affected drawing out intersectional impacts as applicable:

Due to the government’s lack of confirmation on the Household Support Fund’s continuation, the council will no longer be able to deliver crisis support to financially at-risk households through the Local Discretionary Social Fund. Additionally, there will no longer be the ability to support households unable to pay the difference between their Council Tax liability and the amount they receive in Council Tax Reduction. This shortfall would previously have been met by an award from the Discretionary Council Tax Reduction fund. Financially vulnerable households unable to afford basic household goods, such as furniture and white goods, will not be able to source these through the council’s Local Discretionary Social Fund. Welfare interventions such as these can often prevent households from needing higher cost statutory support, such as homeless and social care services.

Financial vulnerability, poverty and debt issues intersect all equalities groups, but can have higher representation for those on low and fixed benefit income and unable to work through age, disability or health barriers, or due to pregnancy, caring and childcaring responsibilities, as well as other socio-economic disadvantages, based on ethnicity and disability.

2. Consultation, engagement and supporting EIAs

What consultations or engagement activities are being used to inform this assessment?

If consultation is planned or in process – state this and state when it will done/completed even if indicative. If no consultation completed or planned, state this, giving an explanation.

There is no consultation or engagement planned to inform this EIA as it is a direct result of the government not announcing a continuation of the Household Support Fund.

What other budget or service EIAs can assist/have been used to inform this assessment?

Household Support Fund 2023/24 EIA. Council Tax Reduction Scheme EIA 2022-23

3. Current data and impact monitoring

Do you currently collect and analyse the following data to enable monitoring of the impact of this proposal?

Consider all possible intersections (Delete and State Yes, No, Not Applicable)

Age	No (awards given to whole households)
Disability and inclusive adjustments, coverage under equality act and not	Yes
Ethnicity, ‘Race’, ethnic heritage (including Gypsy, Roma, Travellers)	Yes
Religion, Belief, Spirituality, Faith, or Atheism	Yes
Gender Identity and Sex (including non-binary and Intersex people)	No
Gender Reassignment	No
Sexual Orientation	No
Marriage and Civil Partnership	No
Pregnant people, Maternity, Paternity, Adoption, Menopause, (In)fertility (across the gender spectrum)	No
Armed Forces Personnel, their families, and Veterans	No
Expatriates, Migrants, Asylum Seekers, and Refugees	No
Carers	No
Looked after children, Care Leavers, Care and fostering experienced people	No
Domestic and/or Sexual Abuse and Violence Survivors, and people in vulnerable situations (All aspects and intersections)	No
Socio-economic Disadvantage	No
Homelessness and associated risk and vulnerability	No
Human Rights	No
Another relevant group (please specify here and add additional rows as needed)	Yes
Postcode/Ward	Yes
Household makeup, including dependents	Yes

Additional relevant groups that may be widely disadvantaged and have intersecting experiences that create exclusion and systemic barriers may include:

· Ex-offenders and people with unrelated convictions

· Lone parents

· People experiencing homelessness

· People facing literacy and numeracy barriers

· People on a low income and people living in the most deprived areas

· People who have experienced female genital mutilation (FGM)

· People who have experienced human trafficking or modern slavery

· People with experience of or living with addiction and/ or a substance use disorder (SUD)

· Sex workers

If you answered “NO” to any of the above, how will you gather this data to enable improved monitoring of impact for this proposal?

Not applicable as the LDSF and DCTR will cease to be delivered.

What are the arrangements for monitoring, and reviewing the impact of this proposal?

Impacts will be gathered through regular meetings with partners in statutory and third sectors, i.e. Fuel Poverty Steering Group, Food Insecurity Group, Welfare Support and Financial Assistance Group. Impacts on other council services to be monitored, for example Section 17 budget, Front Door for Families, Family Hub and Homelessness referrals.

4. Impacts

Briefly state source of data or data analysis being used to describe the disproportionate negative impacts. Preferably provide link to data/ analysis if open data source.

Data and analysis sources may include (not an exhaustive list):

o Consider a wide range (including but not limited to):

§ Census and local intelligence data

§ Service specific data

§ Community consultations

§ Insights from customer feedback including complaints and survey results

§ Lived experiences and qualitative data

§ Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA) data

§ Health Inequalities data

§ Good practice research

§ National data and reports relevant to the service

§ Workforce, leaver, and recruitment data, surveys, insights

§ Feedback from internal ‘staff as residents’ consultations

§ Insights, gaps, and data analyses on intersectionality, accessibility, sustainability requirements, and impacts.

§ Insights, gaps, and data analyses on ‘who’ the most intersectionally marginalised and excluded under-represented people and communities are in the context of this EIA.

Assess impact for different population groups	Is there a possible disproportionate negative impact? State Yes or No	Describe the potential negative impact, considering for differences within groups For example, different ethnic groups, and peoples intersecting identities e.g. disabled women of faith OR If no impact is identified, briefly state why.
Age including those under 16, young adults, multiple ethnicities, those with various intersections.	No – all age groups affected	· Older people’s health is more at risk if they cannot afford to heat their homes, eat adequately, or pay for essential medications / social care. · Young people less financially independent because of decrease in employment opportunities, lower earning and lower benefit entitlement income. · Working age households on lower or fluctuating incomes are less financially resilient and more likely to find themselves in need of crisis support if unexpected financial pressures arise. · Children from lower income households will no longer be able to access Free School Meals support through the school holidays.
Disability includes physical and sensory disabled, D/deaf, deafened, hard of hearing, blind, neurodiverse people, people with non-visible disabilities.	Yes	· Disabled people more likely to be limited in their ability to be able to increase their income to afford additional costs, due to their health/disability needs. · Disabled people may be more likely to need to keep their homes warm for their health. · Disabled people more likely to have additional requirements for electronic health-related equipment. · Disabled people more likely to have more expensive food costs due to specialist dietary needs. · More likely to be digitally excluded. · Negative effect on mental health for disabled people and their families as a direct result of managing rising costs.
Ethnicity, ‘Race’, ethnic heritage including Gypsy, Roma, Travellers	Yes	· More likely to be on a low or fixed income or having limited hours of work. · BME households almost twice as likely to be in food poverty in Brighton and Hove according to Money Advice Plus · There is an intersection between ethnicity and young adults in the city.
Religion, Spirituality, Faith, Atheism, and philosophical belief	Yes	· Specific dietary needs may be impacted by food shortages or price rises on high demand products (like rice, for example). · Emergency food support available may not include items specific to dietary needs.
Gender and Sex including non-binary and intersex people	Yes	· Women are more likely to be working part time, or on a fixed income, than men · Women more likely to be single parents. · Additional burdens due to the cost of Living could have disproportionate impact on women due to the nature of their employment types and barriers to employment for those with sole childcare responsibilities
Gender Reassignment	Yes	· More likely to be financially disadvantaged or living on a fixed income. · Trans people are more likely to be on a fixed low income, in precarious employment or in housing need.
Sexual Orientation	No	No known issues reported to disproportionately affect this group
Marriage and Civil Partnership	No	No known issues reported to disproportionately affect this group
Pregnancy, Maternity, Paternity, Adoption, Menopause, (In)fertility (across intersections and non-binary gender spectrum)	Yes	· Reduced income risks deepening or newly establishing debt. · Unable to comfortably adapt to additional costs associated with Cost of Living, i.e., additional meals for the whole family, but specifically children of school age. · Less able to buy in more food to manage holiday periods, as well as post-natal period when less able to get out.
Armed Forces Personnel, their families, and Veterans	No	No known issues reported to disproportionately affect this group
Expatriates, Migrants, Asylum Seekers, and Refugees considering for age, language, and various intersections	Yes	· Residents with No Recourse to Public Funds including EU nationals without access to benefits in precarious employment or working in the black economy are already vulnerable to destitution if they lose employment. HSF was a means of help that we would not legally be allowed to provide through most other channels
Carers considering for age, language, and various intersections	Yes	· More likely to be on a limited and fixed income due to caring requirements · More likely to have higher fuel costs due to health or disability requirements of the people they care for. · Those on a fixed income less likely to have savings or financial contingency for increased cost in food and other expenses
Looked after children, Care Leavers, Care and fostering experienced people considering for age, language, and various intersections
Domestic and/or sexual abuse and violence survivors	Yes	· In incidents of fleeing Domestic Violence the family is often relocated away from their network of family and friends. · Homelessness places women at a significant financial disadvantage as well as impacting on their mental health and the wellbeing of the family. · Without a network of support, increased expenses may follow due to a loss of informal childcare. Or hours of work may need to be reduced.
Socio-economic disadvantage considering for age, disability, D/deaf/ blind, ethnicity, expatriate background, and various intersections	Yes	· Due to the rising costs of day-to-day essentials such as food and fuel, it is more difficult to manage on lower or fixed incomes. · Some communities will have specific dietary needs which is harder to cater for through emergency food provision · Intersects with age (older or younger), Disability, ethnicity and gender – 91% of single parent households are female.
Homeless and rough sleepers considering for age, veteran, ethnicity, language, and various intersections
Human Rights
Another relevant group (please specify here and add additional rows as needed)

Additional relevant groups that may be widely disadvantaged and have intersecting experiences that create exclusion and systemic barriers may include:

· Ex-offenders and people with unrelated convictions

· Lone parents

· People experiencing homelessness

· People facing literacy and numeracy barriers

· People on a low income and people living in the most deprived areas

· People who have experienced female genital mutilation (FGM)

· People who have experienced human trafficking or modern slavery

· People with experience of or living with addiction and/ or a substance use disorder (SUD)

· Sex workers

5. Cumulative impacts

Are there other budget proposals from other service areas that might worsen or mitigate the impacts from your proposal? Please give a brief description including name of other service(s).

Households in need of support will be signposted to third sector support, a collective resource already reportedly stretched to capacity. We are aware of other budget savings which will particularly impact on Disabled people, young and old age, ethnicity and women.

6. Action planning

What SMART actions will be taken to mitigate the disproportionate impacts identified in section 3? If no mitigating action is possible, please state and explain why. Add additional rows as required.

1. No mitigation actions are available due to: the funding will cease to be provided by central government and there is no alternative funding source at this time.

7. Outcome of your assessment

Based on the information above give the proposal an impact score between 1 – 5.

1= proposal has minimal impact and/or mitigating actions will significantly minimise the impact

3= proposal will have a significant negative impact; however, mitigation actions will reduce the impact considerably.

5= proposal has significant impact and mitigating actions will have limited effect on reducing impact.

Proposal’s impact score:

8. Publication

All Equality Impact Assessments will be published. If you are recommending, and choosing not to publish your EIA, please provide a reason:

9. Directorate and Service Approval

Signatory:	Name and Job Title:	Date: DD-MMM-YY
Responsible Lead Officer:	Tabitha Cork, WRBS Manager	29/01/24
Accountable Manager:	Graham Bourne, Head of Service, WRBS	29/01/24

Notes, relevant information, and requests (if any) from Responsible Lead Officer and Accountable Manager submitting this assessment:

EDI Review and Approval:

Equality Impact Assessment sign-off

Signatory:	Name:	Date: DD-MMM-YY
Head of Communities, Equality, and Third Sector (CETS) Service:	Emma McDermott	29/01/24

ADDENDUM

ITEM Page

101 GENERAL FUND REVENUE BUDGET, CAPITAL 7 - 416

& TREASURY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY 2024/25