Barts Health Equality and Human Rights Impact Assessment Report

Barts Health Equality and Human Rights Impact Assessment ReportProposed actions: things to considera primary and obvious concern is the extent to which initial clinical strategic priorities can beinfluenced by considerations of health inequalities given the lack of local-level evidence (as itaffects people with different protected characteristics).it is important the Trust considers what aspects of its proposed activities will be underminedif strong connections are not made with ‘under the radar’ groups. Currently, public healthstrategies and plans to promote access to primary care and expand community-based caremay be hindered without a robust engagement strategy which avoids piecemeal or sporadicconsultationthe Trust should develop clear protocols around how CAGs engage with groups and howthey demonstrate they have analysed and responded to local intelligence. There is the needto develop clear ‘feedback loops’ so people understand impact of consultation. Finally, theseprotocols should focus on the ‘principles’ of effective engagement, part of which is arecognition that participants’ skills and the expertise they bring around equality and humanrights is often more important than their demographic backgroundexpertise on individual health issues (and knowledge of local community groups) isdispersed across Barts and the London, Newham, and Whipps Cross. As roles combine orare made redundant, it is important that knowledge transfer procedures are conducted withina clear framework that picks up on local intelligence, lessons learnt from professionalexperience, and the intricacies of micro-level health issues. This is particularly significantgiven there are plans for knowledge transfer around issues of clinical importance but nonefor cross-cutting equality and human rights issues3. Improved patient access and experienceThis is the second goal of the EDS. It sets out a clear expectation that patients will be able toreadily access services. Organisations are expected to promote positive experiences ofcare, during which patients’ dignity is upheld.Overview of EHRIA findingsQuantitative research clearly shows that, across the three pre-merged Trusts, people fromBangladeshi and Indian backgrounds are significantly more likely to say they were notalways treated with dignity and respect compared to White British people. Similarly, one infive men report not always being treated with dignity and respect, a figure that rises to one infour women. In relation to specific facets of care such as receiving respect from doctors,young people are more likely to report poorer experiences than older people, people fromPakistani and African backgrounds poorer experiences than White British.Feedback from consultation also revealed, anecdotally, particular incidents of poorexperience which did not appear confined to a particular group. For example:11