An EIA toolkit, workshop content, and guidance for completing an Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) form are available on the EIA page of the EDI Internal Hub. Please read these before completing this form.
For enquiries and further support if the toolkit and guidance do not answer your questions, contact the Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) team by emailing Equalities@Brighton-Hove.gov.uk. If your request is urgent, please mention this in the subject line of your email so we can support as required.
Processing Time:
· EIAs can take up to 10 business days to approve after a completed EIA of a good standard is submitted to the EDI Team. This is not considering unknown and unplanned impacts of capacity, resource constraints, and work pressures on the EDI team at the time your EIA is submitted.
· If your request is urgent, we can explore support exceptionally on request.
· We encourage improved planning and thinking around EIAs to avoid urgent turnarounds as these make EIAs riskier, limiting, and blind spots may remain unaddressed for the ‘activity’ you are assessing.
Process:
· Once fully completed, submit your EIA to the Equalities team by emailing the Equalities inbox and copying in your Head of Service, Business Improvement Manager (if one exists in your directorate), any other relevant service colleagues to enable EIA communication, tracking and saving.
· Your EIA will be reviewed, discussed, and then approved by the assigned EDI Officer and after seeking additional approval as appropriate for your EIA.
· Only approved EIAs are to be attached to Committee reports. Unapproved EIAs are invalid.
Throughout this form, ‘activity’ is used to refer to many different types of proposals being assessed.
Read the EIA toolkit for more information.
|
The proposed consolidation of Hove Park School onto a single site at the Nevill Campus, with effect from September 2028, and the associated release and disposal of the Valley Campus. |
|
|
Directorate: |
Families, Children & Wellbeing |
|
Service: |
Education and Learning |
|
Team: |
Education |
|
Is this a new or existing activity? |
Existing activity under review. The proposal is a prescribed alteration to an existing maintained secondary school under Section 19 of the Education and Inspections Act 2006 and the School Organisation (Prescribed Alterations to Maintained Schools)(England) Regulations 2013 |
|
Are there related EIAs that could help inform this EIA? Yes or No (If Yes, please use this to inform this assessment) |
No related EIAs have yet been completed, as no decision on this proposal has yet been taken and this is the first EIA relating to it. A separate EIA covering any staff reorganisation arising from the consolidation will be prepared if and when a decision to proceed is taken and a restructuring process commences. |
|
Responsible Lead Officer: |
Richard Barker, Head of Education |
|
Accountable Manager: |
Georgina Clarke-Green, Director of Education and Learning |
|
Additional stakeholders collaborating or contributing to this assessment: |
|
Briefly describe the purpose of the activity being assessed:
|
Hove Park School is a maintained secondary school in Brighton & Hove operating across two campuses: the Nevill Campus (Nevill Road) and the Valley Campus (off Hangleton Way). The school's Governing Body, in conjunction with the Local Authority, has concluded that operating across two sites is not sustainable in the long term, both educationally and financially. The proposal is to consolidate all of Hove Park School's provision onto the Nevill Campus with effect from September 2028. To accommodate the whole school population on a single site, a two-phase programme of capital works is required at the Nevill Campus, including a classroom extension, dining room expansion, improved toilet accommodation, enhanced SEN provision and, in Phase 2, internal remodelling and a 3G artificial pitch. Subject to Cabinet approval, the Valley Campus would be released for disposal. The proposal has been the subject of two rounds of public consultation. A first round ran in spring 2025 (169 responses). A second statutory consultation, accompanied by detailed plans and visualisations, ran from 13 April to 25 May 2026, followed by a four-week statutory representation period from 8 June to 6 July 2026. |
What are the desired outcomes of the activity?
|
The desired outcomes of the proposal are: • A financially sustainable secondary school operating from a single, fit-for-purpose site at the Nevill Campus; • An enhanced educational offer, including a distinct teaching block, canteen area and playground for Years 7 and 8, supporting the transition from primary school; • Continued and enhanced access to specialist facilities across the school; • An improved SEN environment on the Nevill site; • Continuity of education for all pupils through and beyond the consolidation; • Fair and supportive treatment of all staff through any reorganisation arising from the move; • A managed and well-communicated transition that meets the needs of pupils, families, staff and the surrounding community; In framing these desired outcomes, the Council has had regard to the three aims of the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010: to eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation; to advance equality of opportunity between people who share a relevant protected characteristic and those who do not; and to foster good relations between people who share relevant protected characteristic and those who do not.
The outcomes relating to an improved SEN environment, continuity of education for all pupils, and a managed and well-communicated transition are intended to advance equality of opportunity for pupils with protected characteristics. Fair and supportive treatment of staff through any re-organisation arising from the move intended to ensure that any selection process is free from unlawful discrimination. The zoning of the consolidated site will help to retain a distinct lower-school environment, and the retention of pastoral structures and trusted relationships through the transition which are intended to foster good relations between pupil groups, including those sharing protected characteristics, as the school moves to a single site. |
Which key groups of people do you think are likely to be affected by the activity?
|
The groups considered more likely to be affected by this activity include: · pupils currently on roll at Hove Park School and future cohorts, particularly those with SEND (including the 89 pupils with EHCPs and 234 pupils on SEN Support) · pupils eligible for Pupil Premium (34.8% of the roll) · Looked After Children and care experienced pupils · Young carers · EAL pupils and those from migrant or refugee backgrounds · LGBTQ+ and trans/non binary pupils · Pupils in Years 7 and 8 undergoing the transition from primary school · School staff – particularly those with caring responsibilities · The wider local community – including residents near both campuses · Neighbouring schools and feeder primary schools · Providers of community facilities, such as after-school clubs, breakfast clubs and local libriaries that may experience changes in demand as a result of the consolidation. |
What consultations or engagement activities have already happened that you can use to inform this assessment?
· For example, relevant stakeholders, groups, people from within the council and externally consulted and engaged on this assessment. If no consultation has been done or it is not enough or in process – state this and describe your plans to address any gaps.
|
The proposal has been subject to two rounds of public consultation, supplemented by direct engagement with the school community, staff, Governors and Members. First round (spring 2025): an initial public consultation was undertaken on the principle of consolidation, with a proposed implementation date of September 2027. 169 responses were received via the Council's Your Voice portal and by email. Feedback from this consultation made clear that respondents wanted to see detailed, well-developed plans before any decision was taken. Second round (13 April to 25 May 2026): a second consultation ran for just under seven weeks, accompanied by detailed site plans, 3D visualisations, costings, and a description of the educational model on a single site. The Your Voice consultation page received 1,320 visitors and 108 Your Voice responses were received, with a 96.5% completion rate as well as 2 email submissions. The consultation was promoted through letters to parents, carers, staff and Governors; a dedicated Your Voice page; three public meetings (one in person on the Valley Campus on 23 April 2026, one in person at the Nevill Campus on 27 April 2026 and one online on 6 May 2026); engagement with the School Council; meetings with the Hove Park Forum and local ward Councillors; and direct contact with feeder primary schools. Phase 1 The Phase 1 consultation was open and accessible to all members of the community, with the survey available online throughout the consultation period. A total of 164 responses were received, representing a participation rate of 8.2% of the 1,999 unique visitors to the consultation page. Of the 164 respondents, 157 were asked whether they wished to complete equalities monitoring questions, of whom 63 (40%) chose to do so. Among those who provided ethnicity data, the large majority identified as White British (47 respondents), with small numbers identifying as White: Irish (1), Other Ethnic Group: Arab (1), Black or Black British: Any Other Black Background (1), and Black or Black British: Caribbean (1), and Asian or Asian British: Bangladeshi (3). No respondents identified as Asian or Asian British: Chinese, Indian, or Pakistani, nor as mixed heritage. The low number of responses from racially minoritised communities reflects the demographic profile of the areas from which the majority of respondents were drawn, principally BN3 and BN41 postcodes covering Hove and Portslade. The council is mindful that responses from racially minoritised communities may be under-represented and will continue to ensure that engagement with these groups is proactively considered through any further involvement or implementation activity. Phase 2 The Phase 2 consultation was similarly open and accessible to all stakeholders, with 109 surveys submitted from 1,320 visitors to the consultation page (a participation rate of 8.0%). The equalities monitoring questions in Phase 2 were optional, and a higher proportion of respondents chose not to complete them, with 60 of the 109 respondents leaving the ethnicity question blank. Of the 49 who did respond, 43 identified as White: English, Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish or British, 4 as White: Irish, 1 as White: Roma, and 1 as Mixed: Black Caribbean and White. No respondents from other racially minoritised backgrounds completed this section. Responses were concentrated in the Hangleton & Knoll and Westdene & Hove Park wards (25 respondents each), which are areas with predominantly White demographic profiles. As with Phase 1, the council acknowledges that the consultation may not have reached all sections of the community equally, and the absence of responses from racially minoritised groups does not indicate an absence of interest or impact. The consultation process was designed to be as inclusive and accessible as possible, and equalities considerations have been central to the council's assessment of the proposed changes throughout.
Statutory representation period (8 June to 6 July 2026): a statutory notice was published in accordance with the Education and Inspections Act 2006 and the School Organisation (Prescribed Alterations to Maintained Schools) (England) Regulations 2013. Seventeen representations were received during the statutory notice period (fourteen online, three by email), reflecting a mixed response to the proposal to consolidate Hove Park School onto the Nevill Campus. While some respondents supported consolidation in principle, concerns were raised regarding the potential impact on local residents, including increased traffic and parking pressure around Nevill Road and Nevill Avenue, noise and light disturbance from the proposed sports pitch, and loss of green space. A number of respondents also raised concerns about the financial impact on the school and questioned whether adequate weight had been given to residents' views during consultation. These issues will be considered through the detailed design and planning process, including further engagement with affected neighbours on the siting of sports facilities.
Materials were available in alternative formats and translation on request. Specific support was offered to families with English as an additional language and to those who needed help to access the online consultation. |
Do you currently collect and analyse the following data to enable monitoring of the impact of this activity? Consider all possible intersections.
(State Yes, No, Not Applicable as appropriate)
|
Age |
YES |
|
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 |
NO |
|
Sex |
NO |
|
Gender (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 |
YES |
|
Looked after children, Care Leavers, Care and fostering experienced people |
YES |
|
Domestic and/or Sexual Abuse and Violence Survivors, and people in vulnerable situations (All aspects and intersections) |
NO |
|
Socio-economic Disadvantage |
YES |
|
Homelessness and associated risk and vulnerability |
YES |
|
Human Rights |
NO |
|
Another relevant group (please specify here and add additional rows as needed) |
NO |
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, numeracy and /or digital 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 activity?
|
Gathering Equalities Data: Approach and Actions Whilst the consultation surveys included voluntary equalities monitoring questions covering characteristics such as sex, gender identity, ethnicity and disability, the optional nature of these questions and the relatively low completion rate means that the data gathered does not provide a complete picture across all protected characteristics. Notably, the surveys did not include questions on religion or belief, which is a recognised gap. To address this, the council will draw on a range of existing data sources to supplement the consultation responses. These include the 2021 Census data for the relevant wards (principally Hangleton & Knoll, Westdene & Hove Park, Central Hove and Wish), which provides detailed breakdowns by religion or belief, sex, age and ethnicity at a local level. Where data on the school's own population is relevant, the school's annual census returns to the Department for Education (DfE) will be used, which record pupil characteristics including free school meal eligibility, SEND status and ethnicity. In addition, the council will take the following steps to strengthen its equalities evidence base as the project progresses through implementation. The school will be asked to share relevant pupil characteristic data to enable the council to assess whether any particular groups are disproportionately affected by the consolidation, including in relation to travel distance and access to SEND provision. For characteristics not captured through the consultation — in particular religion or belief and pregnancy or maternity — the council will consider whether a targeted engagement exercise with relevant community groups or faith organisations in the local area is warranted, particularly if implementation decisions are likely to have differential impacts on those groups. Progress against these actions will be reviewed as part of the ongoing EIA monitoring process, with the EIA updated accordingly should material new information come to light. |
What are the arrangements you and your service have for monitoring, and reviewing the impact of this activity?
|
Actions in this EIA will be transferred to the Hove Park Programme Board action log, the School Organisation Service Plan, and the Directorate Fair and Inclusive Action Plan (FIAP) for monitoring. Progress will be reported to the relevant Head of Service quarterly and to the EDI Team as part of FIAP performance reporting and auditing. The EDI Team will be notified and this EIA will be logged on the Directorate EIA Tracker. |
Advisory Note:
· Impact:
o Assessing disproportionate impact means understanding potential negative impact (that may cause direct or indirect discrimination), and then assessing the relevance (that is: the potential effect of your activity on people with protected characteristics) and proportionality (that is: how strong the effect is).
o These impacts should be identified in the EIA and then re-visited regularly as you review the EIA every 12 to 18 months as applicable to the duration of your activity.
· SMART Actions mean: Actions that are (SMART = Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, T = Time-bound)
· Data analysis and Insights:
o In each protected characteristic or group, in answer to the question ‘If “YES”, what are the positive and negative disproportionate impacts?’, describe what you have learnt from your data analysis about disproportionate impacts, stating relevant insights and data sources.
o Find and use contextual and wide ranges of data analysis (including community feedback) to describe what the disproportionate positive and negative impacts are on different, and intersecting populations impacted by your activity, especially considering for Health inequalities, review guidance and inter-related impacts, and the impact of various identities.
o For example: If you are doing road works or closures in a particular street or ward – look at a variety of data and do so from various protected characteristic lenses. Understand and analyse what that means for your project and its impact on different types of people, residents, family types and so on. State your understanding of impact in both effect of impact and strength of that effect on those impacted.
· Data Sources:
o Consider a wide range (including but not limited to):
§ Population and population groups
· Census 2021 population groups Infogram: Brighton & Hove by Brighton and Hove City Council
§ 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
§ 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.
· Learn more about the Equality Act 2010 and about our Public Sector Equality Duty.
|
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact relating to any particular Age group? For example: older people, people who may be housebound, those under 16, young adults, with other intersections. |
YES |
If “YES”, what are the positive and negative disproportionate impacts?
Please share relevant insights from data and engagement to show how conclusions about impact have been shaped. Include relevant data sources or references.
|
The proposal affects pupils aged 11–16 and a small number of Year 12/13 pupils with EHCPs currently on roll at Hove Park School, including Year 7 pupils who will be joining in September 2027, as this cohort will move at the start of Year 8 to the Nevill Campus. It will also affect future cohorts of Year 7 pupils joining the school from September 2028 onwards. Consultation evidence on transition: a significant number of respondents to the second consultation valued the current two-site arrangement specifically because it eases the transition of younger pupils from primary school and, in respondents' view, reduces exposure of Year 7s and 8s to older year groups, bullying and social hierarchy. Several respondents questioned whether the benefits of consolidation outweighed the loss of this feature. This evidence has been taken seriously and has shaped the design of the consolidated site as follows: · A dedicated teaching block, canteen area and playground for Years 7 and 8 on the consolidated site; · Separate timetables for breaks and playtimes to retain a distinct lower-school feel; · Use of the Old Shoreham Road entrance to support a calmer arrival and dispersal experience for KS3 pupils; · Zoning of the site to protect a clearly identifiable Year 7/8 environment, in direct response to the consultation theme that called for protected lower-school spaces. The transition phase (September 2026 — September 2028) is also a relevant consideration. The youngest pupils affected by the transition itself will be those joining the school in September 2027 (currently in Year 5) who will spend the first year of their secondary schooling on the Valley Campus before moving across, and September 2028 (currently in Year 4), who will move directly to the Nevill Campus. Pastoral and transition support will be provided to these cohorts specifically. Staff: workforce age data will be reviewed through any restructure as part of the consolidation and a separate age-related impact assessment undertaken should redundancy or redeployment processes be required. The Council's HR procedures, including avoidance of age-discriminatory selection criteria, will apply. |
|
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact relating to Disability, considering our anticipatory duty? |
YES |
If “YES”, what are the positive and negative disproportionate impacts?
Please share relevant insights from data and engagement to show how conclusions about impact have been shaped. Include relevant data sources or references.
|
Hove Park School educates a significant number of pupils with SEND, including 89 pupils (9.46%) with EHCPs and 234 pupils (24.9%) on SEN Support. Consultation evidence: SEND was one of the most prominent themes raised through the second consultation. Respondents called specifically for: · Clearly defined and protected SEND spaces that would not be eroded under operational pressure; · Quiet and sensory areas accessible at break and lunch times as well as in lesson time; · Zoning of the consolidated site to retain a distinct lower-school feel for younger SEND pupils; · Operational detail on staffing, supervision and transition arrangements, not just physical space. These specific points have shaped the design and mitigation programme as follows: · Enhanced SEN provision is included within the Phase 1 capital works at the Nevill Campus, including a purpose-designed SEN base and quiet/calming spaces; · The design of the SEN base and associated quiet/sensory areas will be developed in partnership with SENSS, BHISS and the school's SENCo, with sign-off referenced as SMART Action 3; · All EHCPs will continue to be delivered in accordance with the statutory plan, with annual reviews used as the formal mechanism for any changes to provision; · Individual transition plans will be put in place for pupils with the most complex needs (SMART Action 1), with operational detail (staffing, supervision, induction) confirmed in advance of September 2028; · Build phasing has been designed to minimise disruption to teaching and to vulnerable pupils, with sensitive scheduling of noisier elements outside teaching time where possible. Staff disability: any staff restructuring will follow the Council's HR procedures, including reasonable adjustment obligations under the Equality Act 2010. |
What inclusive adjustments are you making for diverse disabled people impacted? For example: those who are housebound due to disability or disabling circumstances, D/deaf, deafened, hard of hearing, blind, neurodivergent people, those with non-visible disabilities, and with access requirements that may not identify as disabled or meet the legal definition of disability, and have various intersections (Black and disabled, LGBTQIA+ and disabled).
|
The council and school are committed to ensuring that the consolidation onto the Nevill Campus does not disadvantage disabled pupils, staff, or members of the wider school community, and that the design and implementation of the project actively promotes equality of access and experience. The capital works programme will be required to meet current accessibility standards, including compliance with Part M of the Building Regulations, ensuring that all new and refurbished buildings, circulation routes, and outdoor spaces are accessible to wheelchair users and those with mobility impairments. The design process will give specific consideration to the needs of pupils with sensory impairments, including appropriate lighting levels, acoustic treatment to support those with hearing impairments, and clear wayfinding to assist those with visual impairments or cognitive differences. The existing SEND provision, including the Cullum Centre, will be safeguarded within the consolidated site, and the school's SEND team will be closely involved in reviewing the detailed design proposals to ensure that specialist spaces meet the therapeutic and educational needs of pupils who currently access them. Particular attention will be paid to the needs of autistic pupils and those with social, emotional and mental health (SEMH) needs, given the concerns raised through the consultation about the potential impact of a larger, busier single-site environment; this will include the retention of quiet breakout spaces, sensory areas, and clearly defined lower school zones that reduce exposure to the full scale of the site during the transition period. The council will keep these adjustments under active review throughout the construction and implementation phases, and will engage with the school's SEND team, the Local Area SEND Partnership, and where appropriate with disabled pupils and their families, to ensure that the measures in place remain effective and responsive to identified need. |
|
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact relating to ethnicity? |
YES |
If “YES”, what are the positive and negative disproportionate impacts?
Please share relevant insights from data and engagement to show how conclusions about impact have been shaped. Include relevant data sources or references.
|
Hove Park School serves a mixed and diverse community. The school's pupil ethnic profile is broadly in line with the Brighton & Hove secondary average. The proposal does not alter the catchment area, the admissions arrangements, or the school's PAN beyond what is necessary to align with the single-site capacity. Pupil Demographic profile: Data drawn from the most recent October school census indicates that Hove Park School serves a diverse pupil population. The largest ethnic group is White British, accounting for 62.7% of pupils, with a further 7% identifying as White Other and 7% recorded under other ethnic categories. Racially minoritised pupils make up a significant proportion of the school roll, including 3.8% Asian, 2.4% Asian Bangladeshi, 2.5% Black Caribbean, 2.5% Mixed White and Black Caribbean, and 2.3% Mixed Other. Twenty-five percent of pupils speak English as an Additional Language (EAL), which is notably higher than the national average and reflects the diversity of families living within the school's catchment and surrounding areas. The proportion of pupils eligible for Free School Meals stands at 35.6%, which is significantly above the national average and indicates that a substantial minority of the school's pupils come from lower-income households. This demographic profile underlines the importance of ensuring that the proposed consolidation onto the Nevill Campus does not create barriers to access or participation for any group, and that the equalities implications of the proposal are carefully assessed with this breadth of need and background in mind. Workforce demographic profile: a demographic breakdown of Hove Park School's workforce (154 staff records) shows that, by ethnicity, 91.6% of staff are recorded as White (84.4% White British and 7.1% White – any other White background), with 7.8% from Black, Asian, Mixed or other minoritised ethnic backgrounds (including Asian or Asian British – Pakistani, Asian or Asian British – Indian, Chinese, Mixed – Black Caribbean and White, and any other ethnic background), and 0.6% recording ‘Prefer not to say’. By gender, 63.6% of staff are female and 36.4% are male. This profile does not currently distinguish between teaching and support staff; a teaching-only breakdown can be produced if required. This workforce profile will be kept under review alongside the pupil demographic data referenced above and will inform the equality-protected approach to selection set out below, should any staff restructuring be required.
Consolidation onto a single site will bring pupils from different parts of the school's catchment together physically. The school's existing equality, anti-bullying and inclusion policies will continue to apply. The pastoral structure, including pastoral leads for each year group, will be retained on the consolidated site. No disproportionate negative impact on any specific ethnic group has been identified. The Council and the school will continue to monitor admissions, attendance, behaviour and outcomes data by ethnicity through and beyond the transition. Staff: workforce monitoring data will be reviewed through any restructure, and equality-protected approaches to selection will apply such as: · Having objective job-related selection criteria that is applied consistently to all at-risk employees · Ensuring that reasonable adjustments are in place for anyone with a disability or health condition, and that outcomes are monitored against protected characteristic data before decisions are confirmed · Ensuring that certain groups have additional protections, such as those on maternity leave, those with caring responsibilities (which can disproportionately be those who are female). |
|
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact relating to Religion, Belief, Spirituality, Faith, or Atheism? |
NO |
If “YES”, what are the positive and negative disproportionate impacts?
Please share relevant insights from data and engagement to show how conclusions about impact have been shaped. Include relevant data sources or references.
|
Hove Park School is a secular community secondary school. The proposal does not change the school's character or its arrangements for collective worship, RE provision, or accommodation of religious observance (including prayer space and dietary requirements). The same arrangements that currently support pupils and staff of all faiths and none will operate on the consolidated site. No disproportionate impact on people sharing the protected characteristic of religion or belief has been identified. Collective worship and prayer space: the school's current arrangements for collective worship are delivered through tutor time, Philosophy, Religion and Ethics (PRE) lessons, and assemblies; these arrangements will not change as a result of the consolidation. As a non-faith school, Hove Park does not have dedicated prayer rooms. At specific times of the year, including during Ramadan, rooms are made available for use as prayer space at break and lunchtimes, and this practice will continue on the consolidated site, with appropriate rooms identified as part of space planning for the Nevill Campus. This will ensure that pupils and staff of all faiths continue to have access to suitable spaces for religious observance at the times these are needed. |
|
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact relating to Sex |
NO |
If “YES”, what are the positive and negative disproportionate impacts?
Please share relevant insights from data and engagement to show how conclusions about impact have been shaped. Include relevant data sources or references.
|
Hove Park School is a co-educational school. The proposal does not change the admissions arrangements or the gender balance of the school. Toilet and changing facilities at the Nevill Campus will be improved as part of the capital works, with gender-appropriate provision and accessible facilities included. Staff: women make up a significant proportion of the school's workforce, including in teaching and support roles. Any reorganisation arising from the consolidation will follow Council HR procedures with reference to part-time and flexible working patterns, which disproportionately involve women.
Travel times: the change of site may result in some pupils and staff experiencing different journeys to school, as set out in Section 6.16 (Socio-economic Disadvantage) and the School Travel Plan. The Council has considered whether this could have a disproportionate impact by sex. Personal safety while travelling, particularly during darker winter mornings and evenings, can be a heightened concern for women and girls, and the Travel Plan will include consideration of safe routes, lighting and crossing points on the approaches to the Nevill Campus identified through consultation. For staff, the Council recognises that women are more likely to hold caring responsibilities and to work part-time or flexible hours; any change to journey times or working patterns arising from the consolidation will be discussed individually with affected staff as part of any restructuring process, with reasonable adjustments considered on a case-by-case basis. No disproportionate impact specific to sex, beyond these general travel considerations which apply to the wider school community, has been identified. |
|
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact relating to Gender Identity (including non-binary and intersex people)? |
NO |
If “YES”, what are the positive and negative disproportionate impacts?
Please share relevant insights from data and engagement to show how conclusions about impact have been shaped. Include relevant data sources or references.
|
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact relating to Gender Reassignment? |
NO |
If “YES”, what are the positive and negative disproportionate impacts?
Please share relevant insights from data and engagement to show how conclusions about impact have been shaped. Include relevant data sources or references.
|
The Council recognises that moving to a single site could mean that trans and non-binary pupils encounter staff and peers who are not already aware of their gender identity or history, which could create a need for new disclosures in less familiar settings. To mitigate this, information about individual support arrangements for trans and gender-questioning pupils will be transferred sensitively, ahead of the transition and on a need-to-know basis, to relevant staff at the consolidated site, so that pupils are not required to repeat disclosures unnecessarily. The pastoral team will work with affected pupils and their families ahead of September 2028 to agree how, and to whom, information is shared, and to ensure that trusted relationships and support arrangements are carried across to the new site. The school's existing policies and practice on supporting trans and gender-questioning pupils will continue to apply on the consolidated site. Pastoral arrangements, including the trusted relationships pupils may have built with key staff, will be preserved wherever possible through the transition, and information about individual support arrangements will be transferred sensitively and on a need-to-know basis to the Nevill pastoral team for those pupils currently on the Valley Campus. Single-occupancy and accessible toilet facilities will be retained and enhanced on the consolidated site |
|
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact relating to Sexual Orientation? |
NO |
If “YES”, what are the positive and negative disproportionate impacts?
Please share relevant insights from data and engagement to show how conclusions about impact have been shaped. Include relevant data sources or references.
|
The proposal does not affect the school's policies or practice in relation to LGBTQ+ pupils and staff, all of which will continue to apply on the consolidated site. The school's PSHE and RSE curriculum, and its anti-bullying work, are unaffected by the proposal The Council recognises that LGBTQ+ pupils who have established trusted relationships with specific staff, or who are part of supportive peer networks (for example LGBTQ+ or diversity groups) at one site, may feel particularly vulnerable if those networks are disrupted by the move to a single site. To mitigate this, the pastoral team will work with affected pupils ahead of the transition to understand what support and relationships are most important to them, and will plan for trusted staff and peer support networks to continue, or be re-established, on the consolidated site. Where a pupil currently relies on a specific member of staff for support, the school will, where possible, maintain that relationship or put in place a clear, planned handover to a new trusted member of staff before September 2028, so that pupils are not left without support during the transition. |
|
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact relating to Marriage and Civil Partnership? |
NO |
If “YES”, what are the positive and negative disproportionate impacts?
Please share relevant insights from data and engagement to show how conclusions about impact have been shaped. Include relevant data sources or references.
|
Not applicable in respect of pupils. For staff, the Council's HR policies (including those relating to bereavement, leave and benefits) apply equally to married and civil partner colleagues and will continue to do so through any reorganisation. |
|
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact relating to Pregnant people, Maternity, Paternity, Adoption, Menopause, (In)fertility (across the gender spectrum)? |
NO |
If “YES”, what are the positive and negative disproportionate impacts?
Please share relevant insights from data and engagement to show how conclusions about impact have been shaped. Include relevant data sources or references.
|
There is no impact on pupils. For staff, any consultation on restructuring will follow the Council's policies on maternity, paternity, adoption and shared parental leave, including the protections from selection for redundancy whilst on maternity leave. HR will undertake a specific review of staff currently on or planning maternity/adoption leave at the point of any restructure. |
|
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact relating to Armed Forces Members and Veterans? |
NO |
If “YES”, what are the positive and negative disproportionate impacts?
Please share relevant insights from data and engagement to show how conclusions about impact have been shaped. Include relevant data sources or references.
|
The proposal does not change the school’s admission arrangements or its support for children with Armed Forces families, including Service children eligible for the Service Pupil Premium, which is recorded through the school census. There are no Service children on roll at Hove Park. The consolidation onto a single site does not, of itself, increase that vulnerability and no disproportionate negative impact on the Armed Forces community has been identified. Existing pastoral arrangements, including the use of the Service Pupil Premium to support continuity and wellbeing will continue on the consolidated site. Where a Service child joins or leaves the school during the transition period, the school’s standard induction and transition support will apply, with regard to any additional needs arising from their family circumstances. |
|
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact relating to Expatriates, Migrants, Asylum seekers, Refugees, those New to the UK, and UK visa or assigned legal status? (Especially considering for age, ethnicity, language, and various intersections) |
NO |
If “YES”, what are the positive and negative disproportionate impacts?
Please share relevant insights from data and engagement to show how conclusions about impact have been shaped. Include relevant data sources or references.
|
The proposal does not change the school's admission arrangements and does not affect the entitlement of any pupil to a school place. Pupils from migrant, asylum-seeking and refugee backgrounds will continue to be supported through the school's pastoral arrangements, EAL provision and links to EMAS. The school is not the principal admitting school for unaccompanied asylum-seeking children in the city, but where such pupils are on roll, individual transition plans for the consolidation will reflect the additional support they may need (including in relation to trauma-informed practice and continuity of trusted adults). |
|
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact relating to Carers (Especially considering for age, ethnicity, language, and various intersections). |
YES |
If “YES”, what are the positive and negative disproportionate impacts?
Please share relevant insights from data and engagement to show how conclusions about impact have been shaped. Include relevant data sources or references.
|
The proposal affects both young carers on roll at the school and adult carers within the school community (parents, carers, and staff with caring responsibilities). Young carers may be particularly sensitive to changes in routine, journey time and the demands of moving between sites during the transition phase, and the school’s pastoral team holds information on identified young cares and will work with the Carers Centre and families to ensure arrangements support attendance and wellbeing. For adult carers, any change in start, finish and break times arising from operating on a single site has been considered and timings will be communicated well in advance to enable carers to plan. Flexibility around drop-off and pick-up times will be supported where this can be arranged. A number of intersections compound this impact and have been considered: · Age – younger pupils in Years 7 and 8 who are also young carers may find a larger, busier single-site environment more difficult to navigate alongside their responsibilities at home, and will be prioritised within the zoned lower-school arrangements and pastoral support provided. · Ethnicity and language: carers from Black and Racially minoritised communities and those from families with English as an additional language may face additional barriers in accessing information about the transition, raising concerns, or arranging the practical support they need. Communication about the consolidation will be made available in accessible formats and translated on request. · Socio-economic disadvantage: carer families on low incomes may be least able to absorb changes in travel cost or journey time and will be prioritised to help access any funding. · Proximity and attendance: young carers, who are disproportionately from lower-income households, often rely on living close to school to balance their caring responsibilities at home with attendance. A longer or more complex journey to the Nevill Campus could increase the risk of persistent absence for this group. The school's pastoral team will work with identified young carers and their families ahead of the transition to understand individual journey requirements, and the travel planning set out in Section 6.16 will give specific consideration to young carers, including, where appropriate, flexibility around start times and prioritisation for any travel assistance. The transition working group will maintain oversight of young carers with intersecting vulnerabilities and ensure that bespoke support is in place. |
|
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact relating to Looked after children, Care Leavers, Care and fostering experienced children and adults (Especially considering for age, ethnicity, language, and various intersections). Also consider our Corporate Parenting Responsibility in connection to your activity. |
YES |
If “YES”, what are the positive and negative disproportionate impacts?
Please share relevant insights from data and engagement to show how conclusions about impact have been shaped. Include relevant data sources or references.
|
Pupils who are looked after, previously looked after or otherwise care-experienced may be more vulnerable to disruption from a change of site, environment or peer group. There are currently XXX LAC pupils on roll at Hove Park School. Mitigation: the Virtual School Head and the school's Designated Teacher for LAC will be members of the Transition Working Group. Each LAC pupil will have their Personal Education Plan (PEP) updated to reflect the consolidation, with specific actions to support continuity of trusted relationships, pastoral support and access to specialist services through the transition. Where appropriate, the views of the pupil and their carers will be sought in the planning of individual transition arrangements. |
|
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact relating to people experiencing homelessness, and associated risk and vulnerability? (Especially considering for age, veteran, ethnicity, language, and various intersections) |
YES |
If “YES”, what are the positive and negative disproportionate impacts?
Please share relevant insights from data and engagement to show how conclusions about impact have been shaped. Include relevant data sources or references.
|
Some pupils at Hove Park School live in temporary or insecure accommodation. The proposal does not, of itself, increase or reduce that population. However, the change in site may require some families to revisit travel arrangements. Mitigation: families known to the school as being in temporary accommodation will be proactively engaged through the school's pastoral team to ensure travel is feasible and affordable; the school's existing arrangements for free or subsidised uniform and equipment will continue. |
|
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact relating to Domestic Abuse and Violence Survivors, and people in vulnerable situations (All aspects and intersections)? |
NO |
If “YES”, what are the positive and negative disproportionate impacts?
Please share relevant insights from data and engagement to show how conclusions about impact have been shaped. Include relevant data sources or references.
|
Existing safeguarding arrangements, including Operation Encompass and the school's Designated Safeguarding Lead network, are unaffected by the proposal and will continue on the consolidated site. Information about pupils in vulnerable family circumstances will continue to be held and transferred only in accordance with safeguarding policy. |
|
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact relating to Socio-economic Disadvantage? (Especially considering for age, disability, D/deaf/ blind, ethnicity, expatriate background, and various intersections) |
YES |
If “YES”, what are the positive and negative disproportionate impacts?
Please share relevant insights from data and engagement to show how conclusions about impact have been shaped. Include relevant data sources or references.
|
Pupil Premium eligibility at Hove Park School is 34.8% of the roll. The proposal does not change Pupil Premium funding, which follows the pupil. Consultation evidence on travel: travel, road safety and parking around the Nevill Campus was the second most-raised theme in the second consultation. Respondents identified specific concerns about congestion at drop-off and pick-up on Nevill Road, Nevill Avenue and Old Shoreham Road; pedestrian and cycle safety; overspill parking on residential streets; and the cumulative effect of nearby housing development. Although these are primarily local amenity points, they have a direct socio-economic dimension: for families on low incomes who walk, cycle or rely on the bus, the safety and feasibility of those routes is critical to access.
Change in travel arrangements and transport costs: from September 2028, pupils, families and staff currently based at or travelling to the Valley Campus will travel instead to the Nevill Campus. Both sites are within the Hove area; nonetheless, for some families the change in route, walking or cycling distance, or bus service used may result in a longer or more costly journey, and for families on low incomes this could present a barrier without mitigation. As part of the School Travel Plan, the Council and the school will map current and future journeys for pupils currently attending the Valley Campus against home postcodes, to quantify the change in distance and journey time and to identify those pupils for whom the change is most significant, so that the mitigations below can be targeted accordingly.
The School Travel Plan will incorporate: · An assessment of bus routes serving the Nevill Campus and engagement with Brighton & Hove Buses on capacity at school start and end times; · Cycle and walking route improvements around the Nevill Campus, including pedestrian and cycle safety measures on the key approach roads identified through consultation; · Information for families on travel options, including any entitlement to home-to-school transport where the statutory distance criteria are met; · Specific outreach to families known to be on low incomes or in temporary accommodation, to confirm that travel arrangements are feasible and affordable in good time before September 2028 · For families identified through this outreach as facing a genuine barrier to travel that is not feasible or affordable, the school and Council will: confirm entitlement to free home-to-school transport against the statutory walking distance criteria; signpost to existing discretionary travel assistance schemes administered by the Council; and, in exceptional individual cases that cannot be resolved through the above, consider what further support can reasonably be put in place, working with the family, before September 2028. The Transition Working Group will monitor the number and outcome of cases handled in this way as part of its oversight of the transition.
Digital exclusion: information about the consolidation, transition and any changes to school routines will be provided through multiple channels (paper letters, school app/website, in-person briefings) to ensure families without reliable digital access are not disadvantaged. This responds directly to the consultation theme that respondents wanted more accessible information about the project. Uniform and equipment: any changes to uniform expectations arising from the consolidation will be kept to the minimum necessary, and the school's existing arrangements for supporting families with the cost of uniform will continue. |
|
Will your activity have a disproportionate impact relating to Human Rights? |
NO |
If “YES”, what are the positive and negative disproportionate impacts?
Please share relevant insights from data and engagement to show how conclusions about impact have been shaped. Include relevant data sources or references.
|
The proposal has been considered against the rights protected by the Human Rights Act 1998 and the European Convention on Human Rights, including in particular: · Article 2 of Protocol 1 (right to education): every pupil currently on roll will continue to have a school place at Hove Park School. The proposal preserves, and is intended to enhance, the educational offer; · Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life): potential interference is limited and proportionate, relating to changes in routine, travel and pastoral arrangements; mitigations are described above; · Article 14 (non-discrimination): the proposal does not differentiate between groups on the basis of any protected characteristic, and disproportionate impacts identified in this EIA are subject to specific mitigation. The Council has conducted public consultation, published a statutory notice, considered representations in full, and complied with the procedural requirements of the Education and Inspections Act 2006. |
What cumulative or complex impacts might the activity have on people who are members of multiple Minoritised groups?
· For example: people belonging to the Gypsy, Roma, and/or Traveller community who are also disabled, LGBTQIA+, older disabled trans and non-binary people, older Black and Racially Minoritised disabled people of faith, young autistic people.
· Also consider wider disadvantaged and intersecting experiences that create exclusion and systemic barriers:
o People being housebound due to disabilities or disabling circumstances
o Environmental barriers or mobility barriers impacting those with sight loss, D/deafness, sensory requirements, neurodivergence, various complex disabilities
o People experiencing homelessness
o People on a low income and people living in the most deprived areas
o People facing literacy, numeracy and/or digital barriers
o Lone parents
o People with experience of or living with addiction and/ or a substance use disorder (SUD)
o Sex workers
o Ex-offenders and people with unrelated convictions
o People who have experienced female genital mutilation (FGM)
o People who have experienced human trafficking or modern slavery
|
· Certain groups of pupils may experience the combined effect of more than one of the impacts identified above. The groups most likely to experience cumulative and intersectional impact are: · Pupils with SEND who are also Looked After or care-experienced: these pupils will be co-managed by the Designated Teacher for LAC, the SENCo and the Virtual School Head; · Pupils with SEND from socio-economically disadvantaged households: priority for travel planning support and continuity of provision; · Carers and young carers with SEND: pupils who are both carers (or young carers) and have SEND may face a compounded impact in adjusting to a new site, balancing caring responsibilities, navigating a larger single-site environment and accessing SEN provision. These pupils will be jointly supported by the SENCo and the school's young carers lead, with individual transition plans reflecting both sets of needs; · EAL pupils from migrant or refugee backgrounds with insecure housing: priority for proactive communication and engagement through EMAS and the pastoral team; · Young carers from low-income households: priority for travel planning support and pastoral engagement. · Disabled pupils from deprived households: disabled pupils from low-income families may face a compounded impact where, for example, the cost or feasibility of travel interacts with mobility or access needs. These pupils will be prioritised for both the SEND transition planning set out in Section 6.2 and the travel planning support set out in Section 6.16; · Wider community impact: the consolidation will bring together, on the Nevill Campus, the pupil population currently split across two sites. The Council has considered whether this could have a knock-on effect on local community facilities, such as libraries, after-school clubs and youth provision in the vicinity of the Nevill Campus, particularly around the school day. As part of the Travel Plan and transition communications, the Council and the school will engage with relevant local providers to understand any change in demand and, where necessary, work with them to manage capacity. · The Transition Working Group will maintain oversight of pupils with intersecting vulnerabilities and will ensure that bespoke support is in place for each. The Council acknowledges that the intersection of protected characteristics can compound disadvantage and is committed to ensuring no group is left behind in the transition. |
What SMART actions will be taken to address the disproportionate and cumulative impacts you have identified?
· Summarise relevant SMART actions from your data insights and disproportionate impacts below for this assessment, listing appropriate activities per action as bullets. (This will help your Business Manager or Fair and Inclusive Action Plan (FIAP) Service representative to add these to the Directorate FIAP, discuss success measures and timelines with you, and monitor this EIA’s progress as part of quarterly and regular internal and external auditing and monitoring)
|
1. Transition and SEND Support for vulnerable pupils o Individual transition plans will be in place for all pupils with EHCPs, all Looked After Children, and all pupils identified through the pastoral system as facing intersecting vulnerabilities (including young carers, EAL pupils, and pupils from socio-economically disadvantaged households) developed in partnership with families, Brighton and Hove Inclusion Support Service, the Schools Mental Health Service and the Virtual School Head o Specific mitigation for pupil mental health and wellbeing: the school's pastoral team and the Schools Mental Health Service will provide additional transition support, including small-group sessions on managing change, for pupils identified as anxious about the move. Mental health and wellbeing will be a standing item for the Transition Working Group, and the post-transition equalities review (see below) will specifically consider attendance and wellbeing data to identify any pupils who may need additional support following the move. o The SEN base and associated sensory spaces on the Nevill Campus will be agreed and reviewed against the needs of the current SEND cohort. o Operational arrangements for Years 7 and 8 are being planned in the consolidated site and will be confirmed and communicated to parents of all current and incoming pupils. o Responsibility and timeframe: development and delivery of individual transition plans will be led by the school's pastoral team and SENCo, with oversight from the Transition Working Group reporting to the Hove Park Programme Board. Transition plans for pupils joining in September 2027 (currently Year 5) will be put in place during the 2026/27 academic year, and plans for all other affected pupils will be completed no later than the summer term 2028, ahead of the move to the Nevill Campus in September 2028. |
|
2. Travel, communications and accessible engagement o A Travel Plan will be in place which will consider bus arrangements, walking and cycling infrastructure and information on home-to-school transport entitlement with specific outreach to families known to be on low incomes or in temporary accommodation o All major communications about the consolidation will be provided in plain English and translated on request. They will also be made available digitally and in paper and reinforced, where required, in in-person events and 1:1 discussions. This will ensure that families facing language, digital or other access barriers are not disadvantaged. |
|
3. Staff Equalities Review and post-transition Review o If any staff restructuring is confirmed then staff with protected characteristics will be prioritised. o The school will carry out a post transition equalities review focussing on attendance, well-being and progress of pupils with SEND, Looked After Children, Pupil Premium pupils and other groups identified. |
Which action plans will the identified actions be transferred to?
· For example: Team or Service Plan, Local Implementation Plan, a project plan related to this EIA, FIAP (Fair and Inclusive Action Plan) – mandatory noting of the EIA on the Directorate EIA Tracker to enable monitoring of all equalities related actions identified in this EIA. This is done as part of FIAP performance reporting and auditing. Speak to your Directorate’s Business Improvement Manager (if one exists for your Directorate) or to the Head of Service/ lead who enters actions and performance updates on FIAP and seek support from your Directorate’s EDI Business Partner.
|
Actions in this EIA will be transferred to the Hove Park Programme Board action log, the School Organisation Service Plan, and the Directorate Fair and Inclusive Action Plan (FIAP) for monitoring. Progress will be reported to the relevant Head of Service quarterly and to the EDI Team as part of FIAP performance reporting and auditing. The EDI Team will be notified and this EIA will be logged on the Directorate EIA Tracker. |
What decision have you reached upon completing this Equality Impact Assessment? (Mark ‘X’ for any ONE option below)
|
Stop or pause the activity due to unmitigable disproportionate impacts because the evidence shows bias towards one or more groups. |
|
|
Adapt or change the activity to eliminate or mitigate disproportionate impacts and/or bias. |
|
|
Proceed with the activity as currently planned – no disproportionate impacts have been identified, or impacts will be mitigated by specified SMART actions. |
|
|
Proceed with caution – disproportionate impacts have been identified but having considered all available options there are no other or proportionate ways to achieve the aim of the activity (for example, in extreme cases or where positive action is taken). Therefore, you are going to proceed with caution with this policy or practice knowing that it may favour some people less than others, providing justification for this decision. |
X |
If your decision is to “Proceed with caution”, please provide a reasoning for this:
|
The proposed consolidation of Hove Park School onto the Nevill Campus will have disproportionate impacts on a number of groups. The Council has had careful regard to the response from the second public consultation, in which 63% of respondents to Q1 did not support the consolidation. The substance of the concerns expressed — particularly on SEND provision, the transition from primary, travel and road safety, residential amenity, the position of the 3G pitch, and the call for more detailed assessments before any decision is taken — has been considered in framing the impact assessment and the mitigation programme in this EIA. These impacts have been weighed against the substantial educational, pastoral and financial case for consolidation. The proposal is intended to secure the long-term sustainability of Hove Park School, to maintain and enhance the quality of education available to pupils, to improve the physical environment in which pupils with SEND are taught, and to enable the Council to make best use of its school estate. Each of the impacts identified is capable of substantial mitigation through the SMART actions set out above. A number of matters raised in consultation (notably the position of the 3G pitch, the detail of transport, noise and light assessments, and any subsequent decision on the Valley Campus) will properly be determined through later processes, including the planning process, on which separate engagement will be undertaken. The decision to proceed is therefore considered proportionate to the legitimate aim of securing a financially sustainable, high-quality secondary school operating from a single fit-for-purpose site. The Council is committed to the mitigating actions set out in this EIA and to reviewing their effectiveness through the Programme Board and the post-transition review. |
Summarise your overall equality impact assessment recommendations to include in any committee papers to help guide and support councillor decision-making:
|
The Equality Impact Assessment for the proposed consolidation of Hove Park School onto the Nevill Campus has identified disproportionate impacts on a number of groups. The Council has had careful regard to the second public consultation, in which 109 written responses were received and 63% of respondents to Q1 did not support the proposal. Concerns raised through consultation — particularly on SEND provision, transition arrangements for younger pupils, travel and road safety, residential amenity, the position of the proposed 3G pitch, and the call for more detailed planning-related assessments — have informed the impact analysis and the SMART mitigation programme set out in Sections 6 and 7 of this EIA. The Council considers that the impacts identified, while real, are capable of substantial mitigation through the programme of transition support, SEN design, travel planning, communications and post-transition review set out in this EIA. The Hove Park Programme Board will provide oversight of the implementation of these mitigations. Matters that fall properly to be determined through the planning process (including the position of the 3G pitch and detailed noise, light and transport assessments) will be addressed through that route, with separate community engagement. The proposal is considered proportionate to the objective of securing the long-term educational and financial sustainability of Hove Park School and making best use of the Council's school estate. The disposal of the Valley Campus on the recommended basis (Option C) realises a capital receipt to fund the works at the Nevill Campus while retaining the cricket pitches for ongoing community benefit. Members are asked to have due regard to the equality impacts identified in this assessment, to the balance of opinion expressed through consultation, and to the mitigating actions proposed, when reaching their decision. |
All Equality Impact Assessments will be published. If you are recommending, and choosing not to publish your EIA, please provide a reason:
|
|
|
Signatory: |
Name and Job Title: |
Date: DD-MMM-YY |
|
Responsible Lead Officer: |
Richard Barker, Head of Education |
29.6.26 |
|
Accountable Manager: |
Georgina Clarke-Green, Director of Education and Learning |
7.7.2026 |
Notes, relevant information, and requests (if any) from Responsible Lead Officer and Accountable Manager submitting this assessment:
|
|
EDI Officer to cross-check against aims of the equality duty, public sector duty and our civic responsibilities the activity considers and refer to relevant internal checklists and guidance prior to recommending sign-off.
Once the EDI Officer has considered the equalities impact to provide approval for by those submitting the EIA, they will get the EIA signed off and sent to the requester copying the Head of Service, Business Improvement Manager, Equalities inbox, any other service colleagues as appropriate to enable EIA tracking, accountability, and saving for publishing. Budget and Staffing EIAs secure approval via different templates.
|
Signatory: |
Name: |
Date: DD-MMM-YY |
|
EDI Business Partner: |
Ololade Ajagun |
23-June-2026 |
|
EDI Manager: |
|
|
Notes and recommendations from EDI Business Partner reviewing this assessment:
|
The outcome of the Statutory Representation Period under Section 4 of this document should be included once the period has closed. |
Notes and recommendations (if any) from EDI Manager reviewing this assessment:
|
|