promoting equality and valuing diversity · continue to mainstream cultural and systematic change...

1

Equality and Diversity Annual Report 2015–2016

Promoting Equality and Valuing Diversity

ECU G

EN

DER C HA R T E R

2

Contents:Welcome 3

University’s Commitment to Equality and Diversity 4

Equality & Diversity Strategy and Objectives 4

SECTION A: High Level Achievements 2015-16 5

Key Actions Taken to Support Delivery of the E&D Strategy 2013-16 5

SECTION B: Annual Equality and Diversity Monitoring Data 9

Student Monitoring Data 2015/16 10

Staff Equality Data 2015-16 19

Equality & Diversity Contacts 53

APPENDIX 1: Roles and Responsibilities 54

3

Welcome

Manchester Metropolitan University has a culture that recognises, supports and celebrates diversity and equality. Our annual equality and diversity report highlights our achievements over the last 12 months and provides a data driven backdrop to help focus work in the coming months.

We have now successfully completed the implementation of the University’s Equality and Diversity Strategy Objectives 2014-2016, improving student, staff and community experiences through a range of actions. Significant progress has been made in a number of areas of equality, notably in terms of disability and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) equality.

As the Chair of the Diversity & Equal Opportunities Committee (DEOC), I am particularly proud of the University achieving the Top Employers UK 2016 list for the second year running, being listed in the top 100 Stonewall Equality Index ranking us 4th place in the sector, to be named the winner of the ‘Diverse Company Award for Education’ at The Excellence in Diversity Awards 2016 and retaining our Investors in People ‘Gold’ level status. We are committed to creating a positive and inclusive learning environment with a motivated and inspired workforce, so it is great to be recognised as sector leaders for our efforts.

We recognise the engagement in equality and diversity from the whole of our University community and in 2016, we have enjoyed a number of activities where staff and students came together to celebrate and promote diversity. Some of the events include ‘TransMetropolitan’ to mark the International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia (IDAHoBiT), the ‘Wonder Women’ event and ‘HerStory’ Tours to mark International Women’s Day (IWD), the ‘High Disabili-Tea’ event to celebrate our achievements for International Day of Disabled People (IDDP) and our involvement in a national campaign called ‘Dementia Friends’ to mark Dementia Awareness Week.

Through the development of our new four-year Equality and Diversity Strategy 2017-2021, equality and diversity will remain part of all strategy development and we shall continue to mainstream cultural and systematic change in our organisation so that equality and diversity is integrated into day-to-day activities across all functions. Social inclusion and public engagement will also remain a core element of our equality and diversity agenda.

We have much to be proud of at Manchester Metropolitan University and we will continue to improve our performance and deliver our exemplary vision for equality and diversity.

Prof Jean-Noel Ezingeard Deputy Vice-Chancellor Chair, Diversity & Equal Opportunities Committee.

Over the last year, the University has continued to embed equality and diversity in everything we do and to build our reputation as an exemplar organisation within and beyond the sector. We are incredibly proud of our progress.

In 2016, we reached the number 2 position in the UK Top 50 Inclusive Employers standard, 4th place in the Higher Education sector for the Stonewall Workplace Equality Index. This progress is down to the commitment and enthusiasm of staff right across the organisation to create an inclusive culture and one in which all students and staff can achieve their ambitions. Our new equality and diversity strategy 2017-21 will build on the excellent work already in place and focus on those areas where we know we can improve further.

Josie Elson, Assistant Director of Human Resources, Talent, Engagement & Development.

4

Manchester Metropolitan University’s Commitment to Equality and DiversityManchester Metropolitan University is proud of its diverse community of staff, students and visitors. We are committed to creating a positive environment where everybody is treated with dignity and respect. Every year the University reports key information to support monitoring and drive continual improvement, not just to meet our statutory reporting requirements.

The University recognises that delivering against the equality and diversity agenda requires more than simple legal compliance. In addition to recognising our legal obligations, the University places real value on the business benefits of delivering against this strategy and associated action plan. Equality measures are a question of social justice and a business necessity for the sector.

Our aim is not only to achieve compliance but to demonstrate best practice and, ultimately, to be an exemplar of equality and diversity within and beyond the HE sector. We aspire to delivering a strategy, actions and policies that reflect the needs of the different stakeholders we work with and the people we serve.

Equality & Diversity Strategy and ObjectivesThe annual Equality and Diversity Report sets out information to evidence how the University has demonstrated its stated Equality and Diversity aims and objectives and highlights new challenges.

The information contained in the report also provides evidence that the University has arrangements in place to ensure that we adhere to the Equality Act 2010. The associated Public Sector Equality Duty specifically requires institutions to have due regard to:

■■ Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation;

■■ Advance equality of opportunity between people who do and do not share a protected characteristic; and

■■ Foster good relations between people who share and those who do not share a protected characteristic.

During 2016 the Equality and Diversity Team, through consultation with the University Staff fora, Students’ Union and the Diversity and Equal Opportunities Committee (DEOC), has co-ordinated the development of a four year Equality and Diversity Strategy (2017-2021). The Strategy acknowledges the substantial progress made in the past three years, but also the emerging and continuing challenges in achieving greater equality across the institution. In recognition of these challenges, and to ensure that we take a data driven and systematic approach to addressing them, strategy working groups; one for students and one for staff, have been set up to lead

this work. The strategy working groups will devise the action plans and KPIs to deliver the strategic aims. The action plans will be monitored by the Diversity and Equal Opportunities Committee. The University equality and diversity roles and responsibilities are listed in Appendices.

The University recognises the significant progress made in a number of areas of equality, notably in terms of disability and LGBT equality. Based on the key findings of this year’s annual report, the University is committed to focussing efforts on race equality, and specifically the promotion of race equality in our workforce, and the specific focus on reducing the ethnicity attainment gap.

5

UK top 50 Inclusive EmployersThe University reached the No.2 position in the UK top 50 Inclusive Employers standard. The Inclusive Top 50 UK Employers is a definitive list of UK based organisations that promote inclusion across all protected characteristics, throughout each level of employment within their organisation This significant achievement has been reported in the national press, including in the Guardian Newspaper ‘Diversity in HE’ supplement.

Stonewall Top 100 EmployersManchester Metropolitan University made its first appearance in the published Stonewall Top 100 Employers list and achieved the rank of 4th place in the Higher Education sector. The University jumped 125 places from 166th in 2015 to 41st place in 2016. The Top 100 Employers list is compiled from submissions to the Workplace Equality Index. In order to feature in the list, organisations have to demonstrate exceptional and pioneering work to help make sure that every LGBT employee can be themselves in the workplace.

Gender Identity Training The University’s gender identity training is recognised as sector leading, and will form part of the Stonewall submission in 2017, where new gender identity criteria will be assessed. The University is one of the

first in the sector to roll out training on this subject, generating significant interest from across the sector and beyond.

Counselling, Health and Wellbeing Service We have substantially increased the staffing levels in our Counselling, Health and Wellbeing service to respond to the increase in students disclosing mental health problems, and the significant increase in the level of severity of mental health. We have added a new Senior Counsellor post, three extra Counselling/Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) posts, five new Mental Health and Wellbeing posts and a new Drug and Alcohol Worker post in the last year. We have also invested in a new ‘bank’ system to draw down additional Counselling support at peak times and have developed a new Online CBT programme.

Equality & Diversity ChampionsIn order to integrate and mainstream equality & diversity, the University has increased the number of Equality Champions from 11 in the previous year (limited to academic faculties and services groups) to 35 this year. There are now Equality & Diversity Champions in every Faculty and every Professional Service area. The remit of the Champions is to promote equality for staff and students and support the mainstreaming of equality and diversity, embed it into institutional processes and integrate it into the core values of the University.

Guidance for LGBT Staff and Students In supporting the University position of leading in LGBT equality for staff and students, the University launched a guide for LGBT staff and students. The guide provides details on the University’s LGBT role models, groups and societies in Manchester, inclusive churches and faith groups, LGBT inclusive medical surgeries and other health references, details of the LGBT Staff network and student LGBT society. Guides were distributed at staff induction and during welcome week for students. The guide was developed in partnership with the LGBT staff forum,

trade union colleagues and the Students’ Union.

Top Employers UK Manchester Metropolitan achieved the Top Employers UK list for the second year running in 2016. The Top Employers certification is awarded only to organisations that achieve the highest standards of excellence in employee conditions. Following validation and an external audit, performance scores are rated against an international standard. Organisations undergo validation and auditing, confirming depth and breadth of employee offerings; this is calibrated against more than 1100 employers, setting global benchmarks. The assessment includes a focus on the organisation’s culture and within that how it deals with diversity. The University achieved one of its top scores for this section.

Investors in People In 2016, the University retained our Investors in People ‘Gold’ level status, being amongst the very first organisations worldwide to use the 6th generation framework. The updated framework now has nine indicators to reflect the very best people management practices. The nine indicators in turn are structured around three key sections ‘Leading’, ‘Supporting’ and ’Improving’. The IIP assessor stated in their report that “Through a historically strong approach and regular development, people understand the values of equality and diversity and how this contributes to both the diversity of the workforce and widening participation”.

■■ Following this success, in June 2015 we received the title of Investors in People Gold Champion of the Year at the IiP international awards. This award ensures Manchester Metropolitan’s place amongst the best of the best and a university truly for world-class professionals.

Building a Culture of Equality and Diversity

SECTION A: High Level Achievements and Key Activities 2015-16

6

GENERAL Equality & Diversity training and development

We recognise that building capacity within the workforce around equality and diversity is essential in realising our ambition to mainstream this agenda.

In 2016, the Equality and Diversity Team developed a series of new training packages across a wide range of topics. This represents a significant investment in the equality and diversity training available to staff and managers across the organisation:

■■ Disability Smart training for Managers and Staff (72 participants).

■■ Mental Health Awareness Training (126 participants).

■■ Unconscious Bias Training for members of the University Leadership Forum (ULF) (36 participants).

■■ Unconscious Bias training for Chairs of recruitment and selection panels (Mandatory) (63 participants).

■■ Standalone Unconscious Bias Training (200 participants).

■■ Gender identity awareness training (102 participants).

■■ Dignity at Work briefings (100 participants).

■■ Development training for Equality and Diversity Champions across campus (35 participants).

Dignity at Work

The University reviewed the procedure for resolving staff Dignity at Work issues, streamlining the process, resulting in earlier resolution of cases. Following a review of the Dignity at Work Advisor (DAWA) network and its effectiveness, all Dignity at Work issues are now dealt with by utilising the expertise within the Equality and Diversity Team.

Equality in Procurement

The University successfully reviewed its procurement processes, implementing equality and diversity considerations into relationships with suppliers and supplier decisions. This significant development has positively contributed to the successes against some of our external validations.

IN REGARD TO SPECIFIC PROTECTED CHARACTERISTICS

Disability

DWP Disability Confident SchemeThe University has been recognised for a number of years by the DWP through the “Two Ticks” positive about disabled people accreditation. In 2016, the Government concluded its review of “Two Ticks” and has replaced it with the Disability Confident accreditation. The University successfully migrated our “Two Ticks” principles to the Disability Confident Employer scheme, and is actively working towards being a Disability Confident Leader.

Careers and Employability ServiceThrough the Careers and Employability Service, the University facilitated an event for disabled students, focussing on identifying disabled friendly employers, declaring a disability as a candidate and increasing disabled students confidence when applying for vacancies. A number of local and national employers attended the event to engage with disabled students.

Disabled Role Model programme Following the success of our LGBT role

models programme in 2016, the University has now launched a Disabled Role Model programme. There will be a rolling programme of features on Disabled role models in ManMetLife during 2017.

Guidance for Disabled Staff and Line ManagersThe University reviewed and relaunched a number of guides for supporting disabled employees in the workplace. These guides are available through the University website and in hard copy. The guides have been promoted through induction events, Disability ‘Smart’ training sessions and through the network of equality and diversity champions across the University.

International Day of Disabled PeopleAs part of the celebrations of International Day of Disabled People (IDDP), the University held a high tea (‘Disabili-Tea’) event, which was extremely well attended by staff from across the University.

Key Actions Taken to Support Delivery of the E&D Strategy 2013-16

7

Disability Smart TrainingFollowing the successful pilot of ‘Disability Smart’ training to HR managers by the Equality and Diversity Team, the training is now being rolled-out across the University. To date, 72 managers have completed the training.

Disability Standard AccreditationIn November 2016, the University applied to renew our Disability Standard accreditation, which we currently hold at Silver level. The outcome of the submission is expected by Spring 2017.The accreditation involves an in depth self-assessment against the University’s policies, procedures and activities, both in employment and in the provision of our services, as they relate to disabled staff and students.

Access for AllThe Equality and Diversity Team, in partnership with the Accessibility Working Group has developed access maps for all buildings across the campus. These include access routes through each building, the location of accessible toilet facilities and 360° images of the entrances of every building.

Bridging the Gap ProgrammeThe University continues to run the successful “Bridging the Gap” programme, which provides work placement opportunities for young people with additional needs from local schools.

Ethnicity

Staff Race Equality SurveyIn 2015/16, the Equality and Diversity Team appointed a graduate intern to

work on a project to specifically examine the experiences of BME1 staff at the University. The outcomes of the report were presented to the Race Staff Forum and to DEOC. This report will provide the foundations for the University’s self-assessment against the Equality Challenge Unit’s (ECU) Race Equality Charter Mark.

Challenging StereotypesThe University has developed and delivered a project ‘Challenging Stereotypes’ with a local Muslim Girls school, engaging the girls and their parents around the opportunities available at university. The girls were encouraged to explore a wide range of different courses, and see the opportunities available to them. They also visited the campus to find out about the support available and to challenge preconceptions around the student experience. Current Manchester Met students from similar backgrounds worked on the programme, sharing their own experiences with the pupils and their parents.

Gender

University’s Women’s Network 2016 saw the launch of the University’s Women’s network. The network will continue to meet throughout 2017, with a proposed schedule of events and guest speakers.

Wonder Women FestivalAs part of the Wonder Women festival, members of Manchester Met’s Gender Staff Forum joined with local LGBT charity, The Proud Trust, to research and host a series of walking tours, exploring some of Manchester’s most influential historical women, ranging from suffragettes to scientists, academics to novelists, Mabel Tylecote to Marie Stopes. The ‘Herstory’ walking tours took place to coincide with International Women’s Day.

Aurora Leadership Development ProgrammeThe University supported 10 women on the Leadership Foundation for Higher Education (LFHE) Aurora women-only leadership development programme throughout 2015/16.

1. Throughout the report, where the term BME is used, it refers to staff or students who declare an ethnicity that is not White British. This is the standard, universal definition.

International Women’s Day 2016 Event, Manchester

8

The first of a number of sessions on demystifying promotion and progression workshops were held for those women submitting to the Professoriate Committee. Sessions will continue to run in line with subsequent cycles of the Professoriate Committee.

Pregnancy2016 saw the development of a procedure for supporting pregnant students and students who are parents.

Sexual Orientation

Manchester Pride FestivalFor the second consecutive year, Manchester Metropolitan University took part in the annual Manchester Pride festival, with a float in the parade through the streets of Manchester. The LGBT Staff Forum is planning a more significant staff and student presence at Pride 2017 and has set up an action group to take this forward.

Stonewall Workplace Equality IndexThe University’s third submission to the Stonewall Workplace Equality Index saw the University leap from 166th to 41st in the index, a rise of 125 places. This is the University’s first appearance in the published Top 100, and ranks us in 4th place in the sector.

Guide for LGBT Staff and StudentsThe University launched a guide for LGBT staff and students. The guide provides details on the University’s LGBT role models, groups and societies in Manchester, inclusive churches and faith groups, LGBT inclusive medical surgeries and other health references, details of the LGBT Staff network and student LGBT society. Guides are distributed at staff induction and during welcome week for students.

LGBT Safe Zone Training LGBT safe zone training was trialled with Student Living Residential Advisers at the Cheshire Campus. Following this successful trial, the training will be rolled-out across student living on the Manchester campus during 2017.

Bi-visibility DayIn celebration of Bi-visibility day, and in partnership with Stonewall and the University of Manchester, the University delivered a joint session on the barriers faced by bisexual people. The event was attended by staff from both institutions.

Transgender Equality

In 2016, the University published guidance and procedures for supporting transgender staff in the workplace.

TransMetropolitan EventThe University hosted an event examining transgender equality, “TransMetropolitan” inviting internal and external speakers.

The events attracted both staff and student participants, and included initial discussions around the introduction of gender neutral facilities.

Gender Identity TrainingThe Equality and Diversity Team has developed and delivered gender identity training, and has delivered a number of sessions across the University.

9

SECTION B:

Annual Equality and Diversity Monitoring Data (2015-16)

10

Equality data is central to equality and diversity work – it is essential to understand both the context of the institution and to identify where action is needed.

The University collects equality monitoring data on all the protected characteristics

and analyses this information in relation to key stages of the higher education life cycle. This data has been used to monitor our performance against equality targets, to highlight any areas where we need to improve, and inform our future strategy and objectives.

Annual Equality and Diversity Monitoring Data (2015-16)

2. Attainment gap data measures the difference between the percentage of those students attaining a 1/ 2:1 classification of degree, of those students who are first degree undergraduates (FDU). E.g the percentage difference in men and women attaining a 1/2:1 classification of degree.

Student Enrolments at Manchester Metropolitan University Shown as Trend Data (Last Three Years)

Enrolments by Age

In the academic year 2015/16, there were 38,066 student enrolments at Manchester Metropolitan University (an increase from 36,757 in the previous annual report).

The following charts and tables provide a further breakdown of student equality monitoring data with key observations. All student data is profiled by the

protected characteristics available through HESA returns; age, disability, gender and ethnicity and includes:

■■ Student Enrolment■■ Student Leavers ■■ Student Good Honours■■ Attainment gaps2 within protected groups

Annual Student Monitoring Data 2015/16

11

There has been little variation in the age groups of student enrolments at the University, and unsurprisingly the largest group are aged 21 and under, representing the majority of undergraduate enrolments (66.3%). The sector average for student enrolments aged 21 and under, is 56.1%.

The University recognises the challenges faced by mature students looking to return to education. We therefore run mature entry sessions, providing targeted advice and guidance to mature learners. The sessions include information on how to apply, student finance, and writing a personal statement. Of the 55 students who attended the sessions in 2015/16, 25% went on to apply to Manchester Met in the main cycle.

The University has also developed a programme of ‘Step up to Study’ events for new students during the weeks prior to the start of term. Whilst open to all students, they are particularly targeted at mature students and those returning to education. The sessions focus on academic writing and budgeting skills, and signpost the support available across the institution. We also offer a family fun day where parent students can bring their children for a fun visit with a range of activities, whilst they also have the chance to find out more about the support they can access within the institution.

Despite these efforts, an attainment gap in line with that of the sector exists for our mature students. This is something we will continue to address.

3. Equality Challenge Unit. Equality in higher education: statistical report 2016: Part 2: students

Over the last three years, the percentage of students disclosing a disability has increased from 9.1% to 11.4%, and is now in excess of the sector average of 10.6%3. The proportion of students not providing information has also increased over the same period. The Equality and Diversity Team has provided guidance and briefings for staff in enrolment teams highlighting the purposes of data collection and providing reassurance that the data

remains confidential. This activity has had a positive impact on the proportion of students prepared to disclose a disability.

The forthcoming changes to Disabled Students’ Allowance may also prompt more disabled students are declaring their disability status and engaging with the University Disability Service.

Enrolments by Disability

12

4. Equality Challenge Unit. Equality in higher education: statistical report 2016: Part 2: students5. Equality Challenge Unit. Equality in higher education: statistical report 2016: Part 2: students6. National campaign to improve public attitudes and behaviour towards people with mental health problems.

The largest group of disabled students (46%) is those students with a specific learning difficulty. The majority of these students are likely to have a diagnosis of dyslexia. This is in line with sector data where 46.2% of disabled students reported a specific learning disability4.

ERAC (Embedding Reasonable Adjustments in the Curriculum) is a University-wide scheme that aims to provide learning support for students identified with mild to moderate Specific Learning Difficulties (SpLDs) including dyslexia, without the need for a formal Personal Learning Plan (PLP). This is achieved by embedding reasonable adjustments into curriculum design and delivery as a whole, thus providing an inclusive learning environment that benefits all students.

Following the success of a number of small and large scale pilot implementation projects at Manchester Metropolitan, ERAC is now being implemented across the University for all taught courses, both undergraduate and postgraduate, from September 2016. This aims to support the provision of an excellent learning environment and outstanding experience for our students.

At Manchester Metropolitan University, 23% of disabled students report a mental

health condition (an increase from 19% in the last 12 months), which is significantly higher than the sector average of 14.8%5. The number of students accessing our Counselling, Health and Wellbeing Service has increased from 1,255 in 2013-14 to 1,500 in 2015-16, with a significant increase in the level of severity of mental ill health. In response to this growing demand, we have substantially increased the staffing levels in our Counselling, Health and Wellbeing Service, adding a new Senior Counsellor post, three extra Counselling/Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) posts, five new Mental Health and Wellbeing posts and a new Drug and Alcohol Worker post in the last year. We have also invested in a new ‘bank’ system to draw down additional Counselling support at peak times and have developed a new Online CBT programme.

The University has undertaken activities, in partnership with the Students’ Union in reducing the stigma of mental health, primarily through the “Time to Change” campaign.6 In 2016, the University introduced specific provisions to support students with mental health conditions who required particular adjustments during the examination period. This was to ensure consistency and to support students with mental health conditions to be supported by professionals to access relevant support.

A peer mentoring scheme has been set up by the Disability Service and the Widening Participation Team to offer all prospective and first year students who have a disability, health condition or dyslexia the opportunity to have a student mentor. The mentor will be able to help our new students make the transition into university and through the first year of their studies. The mentor can offer practical advice and support, based on their own experiences of studying at Manchester Met and knowledge of university and local services. It is the job of the mentor to offer advice within their capacity or to signpost to other services as appropriate. The mentee can contact their mentor through an online e-mentoring website called Bright Links and face-to-face at regular group meetings and social events.

The University also offers a range of outreach programmes targeted at disabled learners, delivered by the Disability Service in partnership with the Widening Participation Team. In July 2016, the University delivered a summer school for Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) students intending to start at the University in September, to give them an opportunity to visit the University and become familiar with the facilities, support and staff, to ease their transition into the Institution.

13

Across the sector, 56.2% of students are women, and 43.8% are men7. There is, therefore a small variation between the University and sector averages.

The University took part in the Inspiring Girls Programme, a collaborative project led by schools and businesses engaged in Business in the Community’s Business Class Programme in Manchester. The aims of the project were to increase girls’ awareness of the variety of career opportunities in Manchester with a particular

focus on challenging the stereotypes of traditional female roles, and raise the girls’ confidence, self-awareness and self-efficacy. The feedback from the programme was extremely positive. 83% of the participating female school pupils said the programme made them feel more self-confident, and 92% said the programme made them feel more confident about their futures. In addition, 82% said that the programme has changed their perception of male/female jobs, and 88% said that the programme has increased their knowledge of different options available after leaving school.

Enrolments by Gender


14

The chart above shows the breakdown of students based on ethnicity. There has been a small increase in the proportion of BME students at Manchester Metropolitan University over the 3-year reporting period. The sector average for BME students is 21%8 and the University population is above this figure at 24.2%.

When comparing each of the BME groups, there is a smaller black student population at Manchester Metropolitan University compared to the sector, whereas each of the other groups have a larger or equal population compared to sector averages. This data will be used to inform future outreach

and widening participation programmes. The Student Equality and Diversity (E&D) Strategy Group will oversee further research and analysis to determine the reasons for this variance, and identify appropriate actions for inclusion in the E&D Strategy action plan.

The University has also been involved in a collaborative mentoring project for white working class boys delivered in schools across Greater Manchester. The model involved year 10 pupils in the school being mentored by current university students and alumni, while they in turn mentored younger pupils in the same school.

Enrolments by Ethnicity


15

Student Leavers Data 2015-16

The tables in this section show the percentage of leavers for 2015/16 compared to the numbers enrolled by Age, Disability, Gender and Ethnicity. Leavers are calculated as a percentage of students enrolled within each category e.g. number of female leavers expressed as a percentage of the number of females enrolled. Sector averages include students that have left HE (but not including those that have transferred).

The overall percentage of leavers in 2015/16 was 5.8%, a decrease from 7.2% in the previous year and remains below the sector average of 7.2% (down from 9.1% in the previous year).9 The University has invested in employing greater numbers of staff as Student Engagement Tutors (SETs) and Student Experience Officers. Their focus is primarily on retention, and they are able to use our Student Engagement Monitoring (SEM) system to trigger interventions for students at risk of withdrawals/suspensions.

9. Equality Challenge Unit. Equality in higher education: statistical report 2016: Part 2: students10. Equality Challenge Unit. Equality in higher education: statistical report 2016: Part 2: students11. Equality Challenge Unit. Equality in higher education: statistical report 2016: Part 2: students

Leavers by Age

This table shows that for the largest student population (21 and under), the leavers rate was 5.3%, which is lower than the sector average of 6.3%10. All age groups above 25 showed a higher rate of student leavers, which is comparable to the sector averages for these age groups. This trend is

likely to be as a result of mature students balancing studying with existing work/home commitments. The Student Strategy Group will consider how the SETs and Student Experience Officers can address this issue.

Enrolled Leavers Leavers21 & under 25,231 1,327 5.3%22 to 25 4,934 270 5.5%26 to 30 2,879 187 6.5%31 to 40 2,882 239 8.3%41 to 50 1,567 134 8.6%51 to 60 497 44 8.9%61 plus 76 9 11.8%Total 38,066 2,210 5.8%

Leavers by Disability

The University is more successful at retaining disabled students than the sector average. However, the table above shows that 6.4% of disabled students do not complete their studies, compared to 5.5% of non-disabled students. Both figures are lower than the sector averages of 8.3% and 7.1% respectively11. For some disabled students, there may be particular reasons related to their health or disability which lead to an

incompletion of their studies. In January 2017, the Department for Education published a report which provides best practice guidance to help universities, colleges and independent higher education providers support their disabled students. The University will review the existing support in relation to disabled students as a result of the findings in this report.

Enrolled Leavers LeaversDisabled 4,346 280 6.4%No Disability 30,837 1,683 5.5%Not Provided 2,883 247 8.6%Total 38,066 2,210 5.8%

16

Leavers by Gender

This table shows the proportions of student leavers by gender. There is no significant difference between the proportions of leavers at Manchester

Metropolitan by gender, whereas across the sector the leaver rates are 6.3% for women and 8.3% for men12.

Enrolled Leavers Leavers

Female 22,367 1,229 5.5%

Male 15,699 981 6.2%

Total 38,066 2,210 5.8%

Leavers by Ethnicity

This table shows the proportions of student leavers by ethnicity. Whilst the sector averages show that 6.8% of white students and 8.4% of BME students do not complete their studies, this trend is reversed at Manchester Metropolitan University, where a slightly greater proportion of white students do not complete their studies, compared to their BME counterparts. The University is therefore better at

retaining BME students compared to the sector. This may be as a result of the work of the SETs and Student Experience Officers, and the development of an Inclusive Curriculum, the use by programme leaders of the ‘Policy into Practice’ planning framework guide and the Inclusive Curriculum Toolkit.

Enrolled Leavers Leavers

BME 9,555 508 5.3%

White 24,811 1,400 5.6%

Not Known 3,402 283 8.3%

Info Refused 298 19 6.4%

Total 38,066 2,210 5.8%


17

Student Good Honours Data 2015-16

The tables in this section show the percentage of student good honours for 2015/16 by Age, Disability, Gender and Ethnicity. Where appropriate the attainment gap, as calculated by the ECU13, is provided, along with sector benchmarks.

Student Good Honours by Age

The University’s data with regard to good honours is in line with sector averages, which demonstrate that older students are less likely to receive a good honours degree. The reasons for this are likely to be

complex and include a greater proportion of older students balancing study and home life, and the length of time since they have previously been in education.

First Degree 1st+2.i % Good Honours21 & under 6,283 4,208 67.0%22 to 25 574 355 61.8%26 to 30 260 164 63.1%31 to 40 262 140 53.4%41 to 50 131 74 56.5%51 to 60 42 26 61.9%61 plus 2 0 0.0%Total 7,554 4,967 65.8%

13. Attainment gap data measures the difference between the percentage of those students attaining a 1/ 2:1 classification of degree, of those students who are first degree undergraduates (FDU). E.g the percentage difference in men and women attaining a 1/2:1 classification of degree.


Student Good Honours by Disability

The disability attainment gap at Manchester Met (as calculated by ECU) is 1.5% compared to the sector average of 1.6%14.

In previous years, the disability attainment gap at Manchester Metropolitan University had demonstrated that disabled students performed slightly better than non-disabled students. The reversal of this trend in 2015/16 may be due to the increase in the number of students who have been willing to disclose their disability status. The Student Strategy Group will consider additional ways to support disabled students.

Students are supported by a dedicated team of staff in Student Support Services, who provide confidential information, advice and support to students about the resources available to them, both within the University and from other external agencies. The University has also recently invested in additional staff to ensure support is available from the institution for students who no longer qualify for Disabled Students’ Allowance (DSA).

First Degree 1st+2.i % Good HonoursDisabled 843 549 65.1%No Disability 6,297 4,196 66.6%Not Provided 414 222 53.6%Total 7,554 4,967 65.8%

18

Student Good Honours by Gender

This table demonstrates 69.3% of women achieve good honours compared to 60.6% of men. Across the sector, 73.5% of women achieve good honours, compared to 69% of men15. The attainment gap between men and women is therefore wider at Manchester Metropolitan University than the sector average.

The reasons behind the gender attainment gap is complex. Research, along with some anecdotal evidence suggests that it may be due to educational attainment gaps precipitated from secondary education, methods of assessment favouring the outcomes of one particular sex, attendance and differences in career aspirations between the sexes. The Student Strategy Group will explore this issue further and identify steps to address it.

First Degree 1st+2.i % Good Honours

Female 4,476 3,102 69.3%

Male 3,078 1,865 60.6%

Total 7,554 4,967 65.8%

Student Good Honours by Ethnicity

This table shows the proportions of students achieving good honours split by ethnicity. The data shows that white students are more likely to achieve a good honours degree than Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) students (72.5% and 51.6% respectively). The resultant ethnicity attainment gap is 20.9% (an increase from 16.9% in the previous year). The sector wide attainment gap is 15.3%16.

The reasons for the ethnicity attainment gap are complex. Young BME students fall into different sets of metrics: ‘young’, ‘BME’ and ‘male’. Students with these characteristics are more likely to be of the first generation in their family to undertake

university education, to commute in to campus, and to have mixed entry/vocational qualifications, all factors which have the potential to make both higher education itself and attainment of good honours more challenging.

As the proportion of BME leavers at Manchester Metropolitan is lower than the sector average, this may also further affect the ethnicity attainment gap. The University has already undertaken significant steps in terms of developing an inclusive curriculum. This work will be developed further by the Student E&D Strategy Group.

First Degree 1st+2.i % Good Honours

BME 2,033 1,050 51.6%

White 4,934 3,579 72.5%

Not Known 559 318 56.9%

Info Refused 28 20 71.4%

Total 7,554 4,967 65.8%

15. Equality Challenge Unit. Equality in higher education: statistical report 2016: Part 2: students 16. Equality Challenge Unit. Equality in higher education: statistical report 2016: Part 2: students

19

Staff in Post at Manchester Metropolitan University Shown as Trend Data (Last Three Years)

Staff in Post by Age

This section of the report provides staff equality monitoring data with observations in respect of:

■■ Staff in Post■■ Staff Recruitment■■ Staff Progression■■ Staff Leavers■■ Staff Development

Staff data is profiled by the protected characteristics of age, disability, gender, ethnicity, religion or belief and sexual orientation. The data is broken down by the following staff groups: academic, professional services and support, and senior staff. Where appropriate, sector average figures are provided, sourced from the Equality Challenge Unit’s (ECU) Statistical Report 2016.

Staff Equality Data for the Academic Year 2015-16

Whilst there have been small variations within each age category over the last three years, each remains relatively static. The greatest percentage of

staff at Manchester Metropolitan University remains in the 46-50 and 51-55 age ranges.

20

17. Equality Challenge Unit. Equality in higher education: statistical report 2015: Part 1: staff.18. Equality Challenge Unit. Equality in higher education: statistical report 2016: Part 1: staff19. 2011 Census Figures – Economically Active – In Employment, Manchester

Comparison of the University workforce against the sector averages17 shows a similar trend, with slightly lower proportions of younger employees at Manchester Metropolitan University, and similarly slightly higher proportions of workers aged 46-61.

The University recognises the challenges associated with having an ageing workforce, not least for talent management and succession planning. The University will proactively address these challenges through its emerging Talent Management Strategy.

Staff in Post by Disability

The rate of disability disclosure (5.75%) remains significantly higher than the sector average of 4.2%18. This can be attributed to the effort over a long period to encourage the benefits of disability disclosure. 8% of economically active and employed residents in Manchester class themselves as having a long-

term health problem or disability19. There has been little movement in the proportion of staff declaring a disability over the last three years. The University will continue to run positive campaigns about the benefits of disclosure of all protected characteristics, including disability.

21

Impairment type % of disabled staff

Long Standing Illness or Health Condition 34.98%

Other Type of Disability 16.26%

Physical Impairment or Mobility Issues 14.29%

Specific Learning Disability 12.32%

Mental Health Condition 10.34%

Deaf or Serious Hearing Impairment 4.93%

Blind or Serious Visual Impairment 3.45%

General Learning Disability 2.46%

Cognitive Impairment 0.99%

100.00%

35% of disabled staff reported a “Long standing illness or health condition”, compared to 25.1% across the sector20. When comparing data for Manchester Metropolitan University with sector averages, the only significant difference was a higher proportion of staff disclosing a physical impairment, (14% of disabled staff compared with 9.6%21 across the sector.) The University continues, through the ongoing work of the Accessibility Working Group, to make improvements to the physical access to campus in order to provide reasonable adjustments to staff with a physical impairment. The University is committed to the health and wellbeing of its staff, and is currently developing a Wellbeing Strategy, which will include

steps to support disabled staff. The University facilitates an access group, which examines all areas of physical access of the campus in order to support disabled staff with mobility issues. The University currently holds a Silver award from the Business Disability Forum22, the only higher education institution to hold such an award, and has applied for reaccreditation in 2016. As part of the work towards this accreditation, the University has reviewed and republished a series of guides for disabled staff, managers and job applicants outlining our commitment to disability equality and providing useful guidance on the provision of reasonable adjustments.

20. Equality Challenge Unit. Equality in higher education: statistical report 2015: Part 1: staff.21. Equality Challenge Unit. Equality in higher education: statistical report 2016: Part 1: staff22. http://www.businessdisabilityforum.org.uk

22

Staff in Post by Gender

The figures at Manchester Metropolitan University (55.6% female; 44.4% male) are similar to sector averages of 54% female and 46% male.23

Whilst the figures show an overall distribution of staff across the University, we recognise that there

are differences across the organisation in terms of proportions in leadership positions. These issues are examined in subsequent sections of this report.

23. Equality Challenge Unit. Equality in higher education: statistical report 2015: Part 1: staff.

Staff in Post by Ethnicity

23

The proportion of BME staff is lower than the sector average of 25.2%.

Research by the Leadership Foundation for Higher Education (LFHE)24 suggests that, whilst it is clear that there have been some advances in improving equality in higher education, there is still a long way to go regarding the full inclusion of BME groups into academia. The University has responded to the findings of this research and has implemented unconscious bias in recruitment training, the formation of support network and monitoring of recruitment and promotions processes. The University will continue to monitor recruitment and

promotions data in order to assess the effectiveness of these measures.

Participation in the ECU Race Equality Charter will allow the University to carry out significant data analysis of staff ethnicity, and action plan appropriately in this area.

Further work will be taken forward by the Staff Strategy Group, in partnership with the Race Staff Forum, to determine particular reasons for the differences with sector averages and to put appropriate actions in place.

24. Leadership Foundation for Higher Education (LFHE) (2014). The experience of BME academics in higher education: aspirations in the face of inequality

Ethnicity % of BME staffArab 0.14%Asian or Asian British – Bangladeshi 1.83%Asian or Asian British – Indian 8.45%Asian or Asian British – Pakistani 6.48%Black or Black British – African 7.61%Black or Black British – Caribbean 9.58%Chinese 5.77%Mixed – White and Asian 1.83%Mixed – White and Black African 0.42%Mixed – White and Black Caribbean 2.11%Other Asian Background 3.80%Other Black Background 1.69%Other Ethnic Background 5.49%Other Mixed Background 1.83%Other White Background 31.27%White – Irish 11.69%TOTAL 100.00%

The largest group “Other White background” (31%), are likely to be composed of a large percentage of staff from across Europe, the United States, Canada and other parts of the Commonwealth. The

largest, non-white group are Asian or Asian British – Pakistani, which is commensurate with the local economically active workforce.

24

Staff in Post by Religion or Belief

Manchester Metropolitan is one of a small proportion of universities who routinely collect and report data through HESA on religion or belief.

In the next HESA return, it will be a requirement for all institutions to provide information on religion or belief. This will allow for a comparison of our figures against sector averages.

The University data reflects national trends in terms of the falling numbers of individuals expressing belief in any religion, and in particular in Christianity. The proportion of staff reporting all other religions remains static across the three year reporting

period. Sector comparisons for religion or belief remain difficult, as not all institutions have collected data for this protected characteristic. Of the staff in institutions that returned religion and belief data to HESA, 33.4% of these staff provided information, 12.5% refused and for 54.1% the data field was blank25. Therefore, there is insufficient data to provide a sector comparison.

Throughout the year, the Equality and Diversity Team promote a range of both religious and secular events through the diversity calendar and through the use of social media channels.

25. Equality Challenge Unit. Equality in higher education: statistical report 2015: Part 1: staff.

25

Staff in Post by Sexual Orienation

Manchester Met is one of a small proportion of universities who routinely collect and report through HESA on Sexual Orientation data.

Of the institutions that returned sexual orientation data to HESA, 32.4% of staff within these institutions provided information, 13.7% refused and for 53.9% the data field was blank26. Therefore, there is insufficient data to provide a sector comparison.

There has been a small increase in the proportion of staff prepared to declare their sexual orientation as Lesbian, Gay or Bisexual (LGB). Sector comparisons for sexual orientation remain difficult. Official population estimates for Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual people are variable. Government carried out an impact assessment of the upcoming Civil Partnership Act, which included an estimate of the LGB population of the UK, to be between 5% and 7%27.

In 2013, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) estimated that 1.6% of UK adults aged 16+ described their sexual identity as lesbian, gay or bisexual28. It should be noted, however, that this data is derived from household, face-to-face interviews, in the presence of other family members, which may have deterred some people from disclosing, and may therefore be an underestimation.

The University has been running positive campaigns about the benefits of disclosure of sexual orientation, in line with our plans to achieve Top 100 rating in the Stonewall Workplace Equality Index (WEI) and our successful LGBT role models initiative has raised further awareness in this area. In January 2016, Stonewall announced the 2017 Workplace Equality index, which ranked the University as 41st in the Top 100 and 4th in the sector.29

26. Equality Challenge Unit. Equality in higher education: statistical report 2016: Part 1: staff27. http://lgbt.foundation/Take-Action/community-leaders/community-leaders-lgbt-population-statistics/ 28. Part of Integrated Household Survey, January to December 2013 Release29. http://www.stonewall.org.uk/get-involved/workplace/workplace-equality-index

26

Staff in Post Data by Staff Group

The difference in age split between academic staff and professional services staff is unsurprising and reflects averages across the sector. There are a greater number of entry-level roles available within professional services including our Graduate Intern Scheme, which are occupied by the younger age categories. Due to the nature of the academic career pathway, academic roles are more likely to be filled by people in 31+ age categories.

Chart 21 shows the division of standard and senior roles across both academic posts and professional services posts.

There are very few staff who are in senior roles from the age groups <36. This can be attributed to the fact that for some roles there will be a significant amount of time required to establish sufficient experience and body of work to reach those positions. We recognise, however, that this is not the case for all roles, and the HR department will work with hiring managers to ensure that indirect discrimination in the grounds of age does not occur.

There are a greater proportion of senior academic staff (compared to professional services staff) in the age groups >56, which may represent different choices in respect of retirement between the two groups.

In this section of the report, data is provided by staff groups: academic, professional services and senior staff.

Age

27

Disability

The overall rate of disability disclosure at the University is 5.75%.

In line with the sector averages, the rate of disability disclosure is higher for Professional Services staff than for Academic staff. The Staff Strategy Group

will consider ways to encourage academic staff to disclose their disability status.

This chart shows that there has been a significant improvement in the declarations of senior staff.

The University will continue to promote the completion of staff records through self-service, via the myHR system.

28

Gender

51.91% of academic roles are undertaken by women, which is higher than the sector average of 45%30. Across the sector, 62.7%31 of Professional Services staff are women, compared to 58.0% at

Manchester Metropolitan University. The proportions of men and women in academic professional support roles at Manchester Metropolitan University is therefore, more balanced than across the sector average.

As Chart 20 shows, men predominate in senior roles in both academic and professional service roles (60.99% and 64.29% respectively). These trends are reflected across and beyond the HE sector. The University recognises that there are particular barriers faced by some women in respect of progression. We recognise that women’s careers can be impacted by periods of maternity and childcare responsibilities. With the extension of the Athena SWAN principles to cover both Academic and Professional Services staff (and non-STEMM subjects), from 2016, further data analysis and action planning will be carried out by the University

to overcome potential barriers to women’s progression.The University will support five female staff to participate in the Aurora Leadership Programme during 2017. The University will complete an analysis and evaluation of the careers of previous Manchester Metropolitan Aurora participants to establish its effectiveness.Additionally, the introduction of the University Framework to Support Academic Practice and Excellence, will promote gender equality in the appointment, progression and retention of academic staff.

30. Equality Challenge Unit. Equality in higher education: statistical report 2016: Part 1: staff31. Equality Challenge Unit. Equality in higher education: statistical report 2016: Part 1: staff32. Launched in November 2013, Aurora is a women-only leadership development programme, facilitated by the Leadership

Foundation for Higher Education.

29

Ethnicity

Chart 21 shows the proportions of academic and professional support staff by ethnicity. The proportion of BME Professional Services staff (17.6%) is comparable to the sector average of 16.9%. However, the proportion of BME academic staff (23.78%) falls below the sector average of 34%. The proportion of BME staff in academic roles at Manchester Metropolitan is higher than that in

Professional Services roles, which is likely to reflect the number of International staff in academic roles. The ECU Race Equality Charter Mark launched in 2016, will provide an opportunity for the University to carry out further analysis and action planning in this area. The University continues to promote Unconscious Bias training, in particular for those involved in recruitment and selection decisions.

Chart 22 demonstrates the breakdown, by ethnicity, of both senior and standard grades for academic and professional support roles. There is a greater proportion of BME staff in standard academic than in senior academic roles, and similarly in standard

compared to senior professional services roles. The work the University has planned in relation to the ECU Race Equality Charter Mark will provide an opportunity for further analysis and action planning in this area.

30

Religion or Belief

The University is one of the few HEIs to routinely collect and report on religion or belief data. Sector returns to HESA remain low, based on low disclosure rates by staff, which makes sector comparisons difficult.

The largest group within Professional Services identified themselves as Christian, some 10.7%

higher than that of the academic staff group. A significantly higher proportion of the academic staff group did not define their religion or belief, compared to Professional Services staff. This may be as a result of engagement by academic staff with myHR. Similar numbers of staff from both groups refused to provide information on religion or belief.

Chart 24 shows the breakdown by religion or belief by each staffing group. Nearly a quarter of senior academic staff define themselves as Christian, with a similar number identifying with no religion or belief. Nearly 40% of senior academic staff do not

define their religion or belief. A significant proportion of Professional Services staff define their religion as Christian (42.8% of senior staff and 41.1% of standard professional services staff).

31

Sexual Orientation

Chart 25 shows that there is a significant difference in non-disclosure rates between Academic staff and Professional Services staff (15.44% and 8.80% respectively). This may be attributed to the fact that fewer Academic staff routinely use the myHR system.

Staff in both groups also exhibit high proportions of refusing to provide information. Sexual orientation monitoring is still a relatively recent development within equal opportunities monitoring, with the first HESA returns in the last year and may account for some staff being unwilling to disclose or define their sexual orientation.

The University has worked hard to promote the benefits of staff disclosure in relation to sexual orientation, which has been recognised by our position of 41st in the Stonewall Top 100 Employers in their annual workplace equality index. The University has developed a popular LGBT role models program in which role models have promoted the benefits of staff disclosure, demonstrating the University as a safe environment to do so. The Staff Strategy Group, in partnership with the LGBT staff forum will continue to develop initiatives to promote staff disclosure.

Chart 26 shows the proportion of staff declarations split by staff group. The data demonstrates significant proportions of staff either not defining or refusing to provide information in relation to sexual orientation. Few staff at senior grades were likely to identify as LGB, with no LGB declarations within the senior Professional Services group. Within the

senior academic group, there was an increase from 0.8% to 2.13% in the previous year of staff identifying as LGB. The University will, through the development of our Stonewall Workplace Equality Index33 submission, proactively promote the importance of sexual orientation monitoring.

33. An annual submission to the top 100 LGBT friendly workplaces.

32

Recruitment Data

The recruitment data for 2015/16 covers the recruitment period 01/09/15 – 31/08/16 and shows a breakdown of recruitment by both numbers and

percentages. The data represents 13,478 applications, 2,849 invitations to interview and 312 employment offers.

The table above shows the proportions of candidates from each age group who applied, were offered an interview, and those subsequently given an offer. The largest proportion of applicants was in the 25 and under age category, which may, in part, be attributed to the popularity of the University’s Graduate Internship Scheme. This group has the lowest rates of interview offer, which is likely to be explained by the relative lack of experience in the labour market of this group. The introduction of professional apprenticeships will support this group in entering the workforce.

The highest proportion of first interviews were within the 51 to 55 and 56 to 60 age brackets. These candidates are likely to have significant experience in the labour market, and potentially a higher level of expertise in their specific area of work. These figures do not translate to offers for both groups. Employment offers for the 51-55 group are similar to other groups. The offer rate for the 56-60 is lower than other groups, but it should be noted the numbers are small for this population.

2015/16 Applied Of those applied received 1st interview

Of those interviewed received an offer

25 and under

3325 24.67% 512 15.40% 60 11.72%

26 to 30 3003 22.28% 632 21.05% 64 10.13%

31 to 35 2216 16.44% 508 22.92% 53 10.43%

36 to 40 1489 11.05% 316 21.22% 43 13.61%

41 to 45 1105 8.20% 291 26.33% 35 12.03%

46 to 50 848 6.29% 205 24.17% 18 8.78%

51 to 55 659 4.89% 183 27.77% 22 12.02%

56 to 60 304 2.26% 81 26.64% 5 6.17%

61 to 65 59 0.44% 12 20.34% 3 25.00%

66 and over 24 0.18% 7 29.17% 1 14.29%

Not disclosed

446 3.31% 102 22.87% 8 7.84%

Total 13478 100% 2849 21.14% 312 10.95%

Staff Recruitment by Age

33

The table above shows the proportions of disabled and non-disabled applicants who applied, were offered interviews and who were offered a position. A greater proportion of disabled applicants were offered an interview than non-disabled candidates (28.06% compared to 20.08% respectively). This is likely to be as a result of the guaranteed interview scheme, as part of the “Two Ticks”34, positive about disabled people charter mark. Disabled candidates, however, were slightly less likely to be appointed

than their non-disabled counterparts. The University has reviewed and relaunched guidance for disabled employees, candidates and line managers, and continues to provide unconscious bias training to all involved in the recruitment and selection process. The Equality and Diversity Team has reviewed and updated all guidance for managers in respect of disabled staff and applicants and continues to promote the revised guidance through training provided by the Team



Disabled 620 4.60% 174 28.06% 16 9.20%

Not known to be disabled

12858 95.40% 2675 20.80% 296 11.07%

Total 13478 100.00% 2849 21.14% 312 10.95%

Staff Recruitment by Disability

34. The “2 ticks” scheme guarantees an interview to any disabled candidate who meets the minimum criteria for the role.

The table above shows the proportions of male and female applicants, interviewees and those offered a position. The data demonstrates that more women apply for roles, which would be commensurate with the overall University workforce profile. The data shows that both men and women are equally likely

to be offered an interview, and an employment offer. Further analysis will be undertaken by the staff E&D Strategy Group to establish if there are differences in particular areas. This analysis will inform our approach to Athena SWAN.



Female 7117 52.80% 1579 22.19% 172 10.89%

Male 6320 46.89% 1260 19.94% 139 11.03%

Information Refused

41 0.30% 10 24.39% 1 10.00%

Total 13478 100.00% 2849 21.14% 312 10.95%

Staff Recruitment by Gender

The table above shows the proportions of applicants, interviewees and those offered a position, by ethnicity. The proportions of staff who apply, by ethnicity, is largely commensurate with the University population. However, White British candidates are (a) more likely to be offered an interview and (b) more likely to be offered a position than their BME counterparts. In order to address this apparent inequality in the recruitment process,

the University continues to incorporate elements of unconscious bias training for recruitment panel Chairs. In addition, further analysis by individual area will be undertaken as part of the self-assessment against the Race Equality Charter Mark. As part of the analysis against the results of the University staff survey, experiences of BME staff will be analysed and qualitative data collected through focus groups with BME colleagues.



BME 4952 36.74% 807 16.30% 80 9.91%

White British 7863 58.34% 1913 24.33% 217 11.34%

Not disclosed

663 4.92% 129 19.46% 15 11.63%

Total 13478 100.00% 2849 21.14% 312 10.95%

Staff Recruitment Data by Ethnicity

34



Buddhist 156 1.16% 29 18.59% 2 6.90%Christian 4082 30.29% 853 20.90% 94 11.02%Hindu 233 1.73% 28 12.02% 3 10.71%Jewish 68 0.50% 13 19.12% 2 15.38%Muslim 1090 8.09% 151 13.85% 17 11.26%No religion or belief 4914 36.46% 1114 22.67% 125 11.22%Other 314 2.33% 73 23.25% 6 8.22%Sikh 650 4.82% 146 22.46% 5 3.42%Prefer not to answer 37 0.27% 7 18.92% 1 14.29%Not disclosed 1934 14.35% 435 22.49% 57 13.10%Total 13478 100.00% 2849 21.14% 312 10.95%

The table above demonstrates the recruitment statistics by religion or belief. The application numbers are largely commensurate with the University population.

The overall rate of those applicants shortlisted to interview is 21.14%. The two minority religious groups whose success rate is markedly lower are Muslims and Hindus. When comparing the success rate from interview to offer, both of these groups, where interviewed, had a success rate comparable to the average (10.95%). Therefore, for these two groups there appears to be a disadvantage at the shortlisting stage.

In order to address potential unconscious bias, the University has incorporated elements of unconscious bias training for recruitment panel Chairs. The University is continuing to rollout unconscious bias awareness training across the University.

From the interview to offer stage, the two groups with lower than average success rates are the Sikh and Buddhist groups. The Staff Strategy Group, with input from the Race Staff Forum, will examine potential reasons for these discrepancies and devise appropriate actions.



Bisexual 342 2.54% 82 23.98% 2 2.44%Gay Man, Gay Woman / Lesbian 749 5.56% 187 24.97% 21 11.23%Heterosexual / Straight 10907 80.92% 2247 20.60% 248 11.04%Prefer not to answer 69 0.51% 17 24.64% 3 17.65%Other 787 5.84% 180 22.87% 15 8.33%Not disclosed 624 4.63% 136 21.79% 23 16.91%Total 13478 100.00% 2849 21.14% 312 10.95%

Staff Recruitment by Religion or Belief

Staff Recruitment by Sexual Orientation

The table above demonstrates the recruitment figures by sexual orientation. The breakdown in applicants is broadly commensurate with the University population and there is little variation in the interview and success rates between heterosexual and Lesbian/Gay candidates. However, candidates who identify as bisexual have a lower rate of job offer35. It should be noted that the numbers are smaller than other groups. There is little research into the employment outcomes for bisexual people. As part of the work towards realising our Stonewall Top 100 ambition, the University has carried out work in relation to bisexual equality, for example by participating in

a joint event with the University of Manchester for Bi-Visibility day, which included a presentation for participants delivered by the Manchester Metropolitan Equality & Diversity Manager. Our LGBT role model programme has also featured bisexual employees.

It is also noteworthy that more applicants were willing to provide sexual orientation data: 5% of applicants compared to 10% in the previous year.

The University has built upon its work with Stonewall to address some of the issues relating to the monitoring of sexual orientation.

35. N.B. This information is not available to recruitment and shortlisting panels. .

35

Staff Progression

This section presents progression data for the 2015/16 academic year for the period from 01/09/15 to 31/08/16. The data is a breakdown of staff progressing

into a higher graded position by each sub category in each characteristic. The charts show the number of staff progressing in that sub category.

Staff Progression by Age

Chart 27 shows the proportion of staff progressions/promotions and workforce proportions for each age category. There is a greater proportion of staff progressions in the three younger age brackets than represented in the workforce profile

(25 and under, 26-30 and 31-35). The explanation for this trend is that for entry level roles (which may be populated by a higher proportion of younger people), that there is a greater scope for progression.

36

Staff Progression by Disability

Chart 28 shows the proportion of staff progressions by disabled employees compared to the proportion of the workforce who have declared a disability. There does not appear to be a significant difference between the proportion of disabled staff progressing compared to non-disabled staff. Disabled staff

are proportionately promoted compared to non-disabled staff. The University continues to roll out Disability SMART training to managers and staff, and has recently reviewed guidance and support available to disabled colleagues.

37

Staff Progression by Gender

Chart 29 shows the proportion of men and women in the organisation, and the proportions of men and women who have been promoted. The data shows that a slightly greater proportion of women have been promoted in the last year compared to men. Given there is a greater percentage of women in the workforce population, it would be expected that there would be more women in senior roles. However, there remains a greater proportion of men in senior roles across both academia and Professional Services. The University remains committed to the principles of the Athena SWAN Charter. From 2016, the Charter will develop into a broader gender equality mark (beyond

STEMM subjects and academic staff), which will provide opportunities to examine gender equality across all faculties and departments across the University. Throughout 2017 the University is supporting a number of participants through the Aurora Leadership programme. 2017 marks the fourth year that the University has supported a cohort of women to attend the Aurora Leadership Programme. As part of our Athena SWAN activities, the Equality and Diversity Team will review the effectiveness of the Aurora programme, by tracking the careers of the participants over the last five years.

38

Staff Progression by Ethnicity

Chart 30 shows the proportion of staff progressions by ethnicity compared to the workforce populations. There does not appear to be any difference between the proportions of BME staff progressing compared to White British staff. Further and more detailed analysis will be conducted as part of the University’s aspiration to self-assess against the Equality Challenge Unit (ECU) Race Equality Charter

(REC) Mark. This analysis will include data from each academic faculty by ethnicity and grade. The charter mark will require evidence of how our recruitment, promotion and development processes work. We will also conduct a REC staff survey to determine staff perceptions of the promotions process, including whether it is transparent and fair.

39

Staff Progression by Religion or Belief

Chart 31 shows the proportions of staff progressions compared to percentage of the workforce for each group. There does not appear to be any difference in the proportion progressions for the minority religions at the University. The greatest discrepancy is within the Christian and No religion

or belief groups. A greater proportion of those expressing no religion are promoted compared to the workforce percentage and a smaller proportion of Christian employees are promoted compared to the workforce population.

40

Staff Progression by Sexual Orientation

Chart 32 shows the numbers of staff progressions by sexual orientation. The proportion of LGB staff progressing (7.87%) is higher than the overall staff population for that group (4.1%). There is some evidence to suggest that those staff prepared to declare their minority sexual orientation in the

workplace are more productive, due to spending less conscious effort in concealing their sexual orientation in the workplace. Evidence from Stonewall shows that those staff able to be ‘out’ in the workplace will be more effective and productive.

41

Staff Progression

The staff leaver data for 2015/16 uses the date range 01/09/15 – 31/08/16. Turnover is calculated as the proportion of leavers

within a particular group compared to the workforce total for that group. The overall turnover for the organisation is 12.71%.

Staff Leavers by Age

Chart 33 shows the proportion of staff leavers, compared to the overall workforce population for each group. The data shows that for the younger age groups (35 and under), there is a greater proportion of staff leave. This is likely to be due to the fact that this age group possess a higher level

of career mobility. Within the middle age brackets (36 to 55), the proportion of leavers falls below the overall workforce population, which contributes to the overall workforce age demographic. Within the older age groups, the proportion of leavers begins to rise, representing those staff retiring.

42

Chart 34 shows the workforce turnover36 by age. The overall staff workforce turnover is 12.71%. The lowest age groups (35 and under) have a turnover significant above the organisational rate. This is likely to be due to the fact that this age group possess a higher level of career mobility. The

middle age categories (36 to 55) have a lower rate of turnover than the overall rate, representing those individuals in their mid-career. The turnover rate for the older age categories represents those staff at retirement age.

36. Turnover is calculated as the proportion of leavers within a particular group compared to the workforce total for that group. .

Leavers by Disability

Chart 35 shows a comparison of leavers and workforce populations. Whilst disabled people make up 5.75% of the workforce, they account for 7.09% of leavers. In 2016, as part of the University submission to the Disability Standard, the University undertook a survey of members of the Disabled Staff Forum. The results from this survey will be used to inform a number of focus groups with

disabled staff, which will seek to ascertain views on why disabled staff are leaving the organisation. The University has updated guidance for managers providing reasonable adjustments and is rolling out Disability SMART training for managers. The implementation of a University-wide exit strategy will examine any of the potential issues faced by disabled leavers.

43

The turnover for disabled staff is higher than for non-disabled staff. Similarly the group that do not provide disability information (which is likely to include a significant number of undeclared disabled staff) is also higher that non-disabled staff. The University has reviewed guidance for managers of

disabled staff and guidance around the provision of reasonable adjustments. The Staff Equality and Diversity Strategy Group, in partnership with the Disabled Staff Forum will further investigate reasons for these discrepancies and action plan appropriately

Leavers by Gender

Chart 37 shows that the proportion of staff leavers by gender is commensurate with the overall staff population.

44

Chart 38 shows that there is no difference between the rate of turnover of staff by gender.

Leavers by Ethnicity

Chart 39 shows the proportion of leavers by ethnicity, compared to the overall workforce population. The proportion of BME leavers approximates to the workforce population. Further examination of leavers data will be undertaken as

part of the University’s self-assessment against the Race Equality Chartermark (ECU). The implementation of a University-wide exit strategy will examine any of the potential issues faced by BME leavers.

45

Chart 40 shows that there is no significant difference between the turnover rate of staff by ethnicity, and both are close to the organisational rate of 12.71%. For those staff who do not provide ethnicity data, or whose data is unknown, the

turnover is much higher. It should be noted that for these groups the numbers of staff are smaller (Information refused: 12 leavers from overall population of 77; Unknown: nine leavers from a staff population of 24).

Leavers by Religion or Belief

Chart 41 shows a comparison of the proportion of leavers compared to the workforce population for each group. The data shows that a smaller proportion of leavers are Christian compared to the

workforce population and a higher proportion of leavers are those with no religion, compared to the workforce population of that group.

46

Chart 42 shows the staff turnover by religion or belief. The turnover of Christian staff and Hindu staff is significantly lower than that across the organisation. From the minority religions, the turnover of Muslim, Jewish and Buddhist staff are higher than the organisational turnover, with

Jewish staff having the highest staff turnover. The Staff Equality and Diversity Strategy Group, in partnership with the Race Staff Forum will attempt to establish reasons for this disparity and plan actions appropriately.

Leavers by Sexual Orientation

Chart 43 shows the comparison of the proportion of staff leavers by sexual orientation, compared to the workforce population of each group. The data appears to show slightly higher proportion of

leavers in the LGB populations. The implementation of a university-wide exit strategy will examine particular issues relating to staff leavers.

47

Chart 44 shows the workforce turnover by sexual orientation. The group with the highest turnover are bisexual staff (representing six leavers from a workforce total of 18). Lesbian and gay staff also have a higher turnover than across the organisation. The University has invested in promoting LGBT

equality in the last 12 months. The Staff Equality and Diversity Strategy Group will work closely with the LGBT staff network to examine the rates of turnover, attempt to ascertain potential reasons for the differences, and action plan accordingly.

Reason for Leaving

The table below illustrates the reasons that staff gave for leaving the organisation. The most frequent reason for leaving cited was voluntary resignation (Other), with an increase from 15.3% in the previous

year. The majority of respondents cited a voluntary reason for leaving the organisation such as voluntary resignation (54.7%) or retirement (14%).

Reason for leaving Number %Vol. Resign Other 89 19.8End of Contract 78 17.4Vol. Resign External Promotion 71 15.8Retirement 63 14.0Vol. Resign Career Change 45 10.0Vol. Resign Personal Circs. 22 4.9Compromise Agreement 17 3.8Redundancy (Voluntary) 11 2.4Vol. Resign Family 10 2.2Conduct Dismissal 9 2.0Vol. Resign Unhappy 9 2.0Capability Dismissal 5 1.1Failed to Complete Probation 5 1.1Redundancy (Compulsory) 4 0.9Termination of Appt 4 0.9Death in Service 3 0.7Ill-Health Retired 3 0.7Early Retirement 1 0.2Total 449 100.0

Further analysis of the reasons for leaving has not demonstrated any particular trends in relation to protected groups. Detailed analysis will continue

through the examination of data collected through the exit strategy.

48

Intersectionality

As part of the development of the Athena SWAN programme, Institutions are increasingly becoming aware of the need to examine potential intersectional discrimination. The University Athena SWAN action plan sets out that intersectional data for promotions and recruitment should be included within the annual report. This section examines one of the most widely researched intersections of ethnicity and gender.

Intersectionality can be defined as “The interconnected nature of social categorisations such as race, class, and gender as they apply to a given individual or group, regarded as creating overlapping and interdependent systems of discrimination or disadvantage.”37

Chart 45 shows the proportions of each group promoted compared to workforce populations. The data shows that the chance of promotion is largely comparable to the workforce population for

that group. There was a slightly lower proportion of white men promoted compared to the overall population.

37. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/intersectionality

When the data is presented as a percentage of each group that has been promoted, there does not

appear to be significant differences between each group. (Chart 51 above).

49

The recruitment data was analysed by the intersection of ethnicity and gender. The chart above shows the results. The data shows that the majority of applications are from white women, followed by white men, BME women and BME men.

From all applications, 21.14% of applicants were invited to interview. For white female applicants this figure rose to 24.77% and for white male applicants 23.82%. 18.24% of BME women applicants were shortlisted and only 14.11% of BME male applicants (7% below the overall) were shortlisted.

From interview to offer, 10.95% (overall) interview candidates received an offer of employment. The rates of offer (from interview) are similar for each group.

Whilst there does not appear to be any significant differences in outcome from interview to offer stage, BME men appear to be disadvantaged in respect of being invited to interview.

Further analysis, as part of the University’s self-assessment for the Race Equality Chartermark will interrogate these issues further, including whether there is a particular impact as a result of visa requirements for International staff.

50

Age Total number of staff by age

% of total staff by age

Number of staff by age who have attended training

% of staff by age who have attended training

25 and under 179 5.0% 152 84.92%

26 to 30 289 8.1% 217 75.09%

31 to 35 434 12.2% 285 65.67%

36 to 40 414 11.7% 247 59.66%

41 to 45 465 13.1% 289 62.15%

46 to 50 545 15.4% 358 65.69%

51 to 55 537 15.1% 333 62.01%

56 to 60 420 11.8% 258 61.43%

61 to 65 203 5.7% 105 51.72%

66 or older 67 1.9% 20 29.85%

Total 3553 100.0% 2264

Staff Development

The following section examines staff development within the University, and the instances at which staff have accessed development opportunities at the University. In the academic year of 2015/16 there were 248 training sessions attended that were provided centrally by the University. The total number of

participations was 5,863 (some staff will have attended more than one course), and 2,264 members of staff attended at least one training course in the 12 month reporting period. The staff participating in staff development sessions are described below by the protected characteristics.

Age

The table above shows the proportions of the workforce by age groups, and the proportions of each age group that has accessed staff development opportunities in the reporting period. Despite being one of the smaller staff groups, the 25 and under group has the greatest proportion staff having attended development sessions. This is likely to be as a result of the Graduate Intern Scheme through which the interns are provided with a comprehensive development programme reflecting that stage in their career. The 26 to 30 age group is also similarly high in terms of the

proportion of staff members attending courses. Attendance at staff development sessions falls from the 31 to 35 group, and remains consistent until the 46 to 50 and 51 to 55 groups, where there is a small increase. The smallest proportion of staff developments took place in the 66 or older age group, with just a third undergoing staff development in the last 12 months. It is likely that the older staff group, in preparation for retirement, are less likely to engage in staff development activities.

51

Disability Total number of staff by disability

% of total staff by a disability

Number of staff by disability who have attended training

% of staff by disability who have attended training

Declared Disabled 203 5.54 167 82.27%

Not known to be Disabled

3191 90.29 2060 64.56%

Question not answered

139 4.17 37 26.62%

Total 3533 100% 2264

Disability

The table above shows the proportion of staff engaged in development activities, by disability. The figures show that disabled employees were more likely to take part in staff development activities compared to non-disabled colleagues. There is no

apparent explanation for the differences between these two groups, and the University will engage with the Disabled Staff Forum to identify reasons between the differences.

Gender Total number of staff by gender

% of total staff by gender

Number of staff by gender who have attended training

% of staff by gender who have attended training

Female 1963 55.56% 1338 68.16%

Male 1570 44.44% 926 53.98%

Total 3533 100% 2264

Gender

The table above shows the proportions of men and women who have participated in development opportunities within the last year. 68.16% of women have attending training course, whereas only 53.98% of men have participated. There are a number of explanations for the data in relation to gender. Significant numbers of training opportunities have been delivered to staff in both Facilities and Faculty SAS, both areas in which women predominate.

Since there are more men in senior roles across the University, men, as an overall proportion are less likely to undertake training.

Anecdotally, women are more likely to be able to identify particular skills gaps than men, and are therefore more likely to undertake development sessions.

Ethnicity Total number of staff by ethnicity

% of total staff by ethnicity

Number of staff by ethnicity who have attended training

% of staff by ethnicity who have attended training

BME 726 76.60% 440 60.60%

White British 2706 20.55% 1769 65.37%

Information refused or undefined

101 2.86% 55 54.46%

Total 3533 100% 2264

Ethnicity

The table above shows that there is little difference between the proportions of BME and White British staff accessing development opportunities, with the proportions attending at 60.60% and 65.37%

respectively. Overall, therefore, there does not appear to be barriers to BME staff attending staff development sessions.

52

Religion or Belief Total number of staff by Religion or Belief

% of total staff by Religion or Belief

Number of staff by Religion or Belief who have attended training

% of staff by Religion or Belief who have attended training

Buddhist 23 0.65% 12 52.17%

Christian 1285 36.37% 851 66.23%

Hindu 42 1.19% 30 71.43%

Information Refused

451 12.77% 269 59.65%

Jewish 25 0.71% 16 64.00%

Muslim 101 2.86% 66 65.35%

No Religion or Belief

1057 29.92% 721 68.21%

Other 102 2.89% 73 71.57%

Undefined 447 12.65% 226 50.56%

Total 3533 100% 2264

Religion or Belief

The table above shows the proportions of staff engaged in staff development sessions, defined by religion or belief. The Hindu group were the group with the highest level of participation (71.43%), with

Buddhists having the lowest rate of participation (52.17%). It should be noted that within both groups the overall numbers are small.

Sexual Orientation

Total number of staff by sexual orientation

% of total staff by sexual orientation

Number of staff by sexual orientation who have attended training

% of staff by sexual orientation who have attended training

Heterosexual 2488 70.4% 1647 66.20%

Information Refused

456 12.9% 273 59.87%

Gay Man, Gay Woman / Lesbian

144 4.1% 112 77.78%

Undefined 412 11.7% 212 51.46%

Bisexual 18 0.5% 12 66.67%

Other 15 0.4% 8 53.33%

Total 3533 100% 2264

Sexual Orientation

The table above shows the proportion of staff groups who have attended staff development sessions by sexual orientation. Although the numbers are smaller, as a workforce average,

individuals who identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual are more likely to attend staff development sessions than their heterosexual counterparts.

53

Equality & Diversity ContactsTalent, Engagement & Development

Assistant HR of Director: Talent, Engagement & DevelopmentJosie Elson [email protected] 247 6496

Equality & Diversity ManagerStuart McKenna [email protected] 247 3313

Equality & Diversity SpecialistMona Patel [email protected] 0161 247 3301

Equality & Diversity Co-ordinatorLydia [email protected] 0161 247 6419

General Equality & Diversity contact: [email protected] 0161 247 6494

We would like to thank all our colleagues and partners who have supported our equality and diversity activities over the past year.

mailto:[email protected]





54

APPENDIX 1Roles and Responsibilities

1. Overall responsibility for equality and diversity sits with the Vice-Chancellor. This includes responsibility for ensuring that the Equality and Diversity Policy is communicated, implemented, monitored and continuously reviewed according to legislation.

2. The Governing Body will oversee the University’s progress with the Policy through regular agenda items at meetings of the Board. An identified member of the Board is responsible for taking the lead on equality and diversity matters.

3. The Diversity and Equal Opportunities Committee (DEOC) has a responsibility for ensuring that our aims regarding equality and diversity are met and for fostering a working and learning environment in which all staff and students can fulfil their potential and for driving forward the implementation of the Policy.

4. The Staff Equality Fora will support the implementation of the Policy, Equality and Diversity Strategy and action plan. Their role will include consultation and involvement in equality-proofing University policies through the Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) process.

5. The Disability Network Group will consider issues pertaining to disabled students. The Network will identify, support and disseminate good practice in relation to the learning and teaching of disabled students with the aim of developing an inclusive learning environment. Issues which need to be clarified at university level will be brought to DEOC.

6. The Assistant Director of HR: Talent, Engagement and Development will ensure that staff and managers are aware of their responsibilities under this Policy and provide appropriate training and support to enable them to fulfil them.

7. University Executive Group, Heads of Department, managers and supervisors are responsible for promoting equality and diversity to students and staff. Additionally, line managers are responsible for ensuring that staff identified as having specific responsibilities engage with the Policy and carry out actions arising from the Equality and Diversity Strategy and its associated objectives.

8. The Equality and Diversity Champions, through their work within their Faculty/Division will support the mainstreaming of equality and diversity to embed it into institutional processes and integrating it into the core values of the University. They will meet termly with the Faculty Pro-Vice Chancellor/Director to review the Faculty/Division progress against objectives.

9. The Director of Finance will have responsibility for putting in place rigorous procurement systems for ensuring all contractors and tendering organisations comply with the University’s Equality and Diversity Policy.

10. Trade Unions will provide advice, support and representation for their members and engage with the University to promote equal opportunities, prevent unlawful discrimination and help to foster good relations.

11. Students’ Union representatives will receive feedback from students and raise any issues. The Union will also keep in regular contact with all the course representatives so that any feedback that they have can be given to the appropriate department/committee in the University.

12. All members of staff, students, external partners, service providers and suppliers in the University are expected to comply with the Policy to ensure fair, equal and appropriate treatment in all aspects of work and study.

56

This report is available online at www.mmu.ac.uk/equality-and-diversity

To request another format please contact us on +44 (0)161 247 6494 or email [email protected]

ECU G

EN

DER C HA R T E R

http://www.mmu.ac.uk/equality-and-diversity


promoting equality and valuing diversity · continue to mainstream cultural and systematic change...

Documents