PSO 2800 - Inside Time

PSO 2800 Annexes – Page 341. you could think about the way the revision is to be written and the scope for interpretation allowedminimised;2. you could strengthen management checks to ensure the potential for inconsistency is minimised andindividual members of staff are held accountable for the decisions they have taken.These are just two examples of solutions that are available to you, there may more – staff in Race EqualityAction Group will be happy to discuss this in more detail with you.If you have:indicated in section 3 that this function, policy or practice has come to attention in the past as having a relevanceto race quality, orindicated in section 4 that it could have a differential impact on staff, prisoners or visitors of different racialgroups, orindicated in section 5 that it allows staff to exercise discretion in the way it is implemented then this wouldindicate a “High Relevance” to Race Equality and you MUST complete a full impact assessment (see section 2“Full Impact Assessment Template)If you haveindicated in section 3 that this function, policy or practice has NOT come to attention in the past as having arelevance to race quality, orindicated in section 4 that it could NOT have a differential impact on staff, prisoners or visitors of different racialgroups, orindicated in section 5 that it DOES NOT allow staff to exercise discretion in the way it is implementedthen this would indicate a “Low Relevance” to Race Equality and a full impact assessment will not be required.Please circle which one applies in this case:High RelevanceLow RelevanceName of person undertaking this initial screening…………………………………………………………Signed…………………………………………………Date……………………………………………………Ratified by Chair of REATSigned………………………………………………….Date…………………………………………………….Issue No. 264 issue date 25/09/06