Equality Impact Assessment: Test a Council Decision

An equality impact assessment can expose whether a council has properly tested a decision before approving it. That matters when services are cut, charges increase, staff structures change, contracts move, or eligibility rules tighten.

Councils have wide responsibilities, but they don’t have unlimited freedom. The Public Sector Equality Duty requires them to consider how decisions may affect people with protected characteristics. A clear test starts with the law, then follows the evidence.

What an equality impact assessment should test

An equality impact assessment, often called an EIA or EqIA, is a written review of a proposed policy, service, budget measure, project or organisational change. It asks whether the proposal could create unequal outcomes, remove barriers, or affect relations between different groups.

The legal duty comes from section 149 of the Equality Act 2010. Under the Public Sector Equality Duty, a public authority must have due regard to three aims:

• eliminating discrimination, harassment and victimisation;
• advancing equality of opportunity;
• fostering good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who don’t.

The duty applies to public authorities in Great Britain, including councils. The GOV.UK guidance on the Public Sector Equality Duty says the level of consideration should match the seriousness and likely effect of the proposal.

An EIA is a common way to record that consideration. However, the assessment itself isn’t the legal duty. A council can’t avoid its obligations by completing a thin form, and it may still breach the duty if its decision-making process ignores equality evidence.

The relevant characteristics include age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation. Council forms may also ask about marriage and civil partnership because those characteristics matter under the wider Equality Act framework.

A council doesn’t have to choose the option with the smallest equality impact. It must show that equality was considered before the choice was made.

How to test an equality impact assessment

A useful review follows the decision from its starting point to its proposed outcome. The following sequence works for budget reports, service changes and major policy decisions.

1. Define the decision precisely

Start by identifying what the council is actually approving. “Efficiency savings” is too broad. The report should state whether it proposes closing a facility, reducing opening hours, changing eligibility, increasing fees, removing a post or transferring a service to a contractor.

Also identify the decision-maker. Is the matter going to full council, a cabinet, a committee, an individual cabinet member or an officer using delegated powers? The council’s constitution will usually explain who has authority and which scrutiny route applies.

For local readers, a Durham council governance explained guide can help clarify which local authority or tier controls a particular service. That distinction matters because a complaint aimed at the wrong body may go nowhere.

2. Identify who could be affected

The assessment should name the groups that use, receive or depend on the service. A library closure, for example, may affect older residents, disabled users, carers, children and people without reliable transport in different ways.

Look for evidence about actual users rather than broad statements about the whole population. Useful information may include service-use figures, complaints, waiting times, travel distances, census data, previous consultation responses and feedback from representative organisations.

A council should also consider people who may not appear in its records. Some residents face barriers that stop them using a service in the first place. Low take-up doesn’t automatically prove that a service is unnecessary.

3. Assess the likely effect

The assessment should explain whether the impact is positive, negative, neutral or uncertain. It should also distinguish between direct and indirect effects.

A change to a concessionary charge may directly affect disabled residents if they qualify for a discount. It could have an indirect effect on people with caring responsibilities if the change makes a support service harder to access.

The analysis should state the scale of the effect, how many people may be affected, how serious it could be and whether the impact is temporary or long-term. It should examine more than one option, including the consequences of doing nothing.

4. Compare alternatives and mitigation

If the council identifies a negative effect, the report should show what it can do about it. Possible measures include phased implementation, accessible communications, exemptions, alternative venues, longer notice periods or maintaining a smaller service.

Mitigation must be realistic. A promise to “monitor the situation” means little without a named officer, clear measures and a review date.

5. Record the reasoning

The final report should link the evidence to the recommendation. Councillors need to see what the assessment found, what changed because of it and why the preferred option remains lawful and reasonable.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission briefing for elected members makes clear that councillors themselves must give due regard to equality when taking decisions. They can’t assume that officers have dealt with the issue simply because an EIA is attached to the papers.

What counts as good evidence?

A strong equality impact assessment is proportionate, but proportionate doesn’t mean superficial. A minor change to a booking process may need a short assessment. A large service closure, restructuring or funding reduction needs more detailed work.

The assessment should answer four practical questions:

1. What is changing?
2. Which groups may experience a different effect?
3. What evidence supports that conclusion?
4. What will the council do if the effect is harmful?

Consultation can provide valuable evidence, but it shouldn’t be treated as a substitute for analysis. A council may receive only a small number of responses because the consultation was poorly advertised, difficult to access or held during an unsuitable period.

The timing also matters. An assessment prepared after the cabinet has already agreed the proposal cannot properly inform that decision. Councils should begin the work while options are still open, then update it if the proposal changes.

Evidence should include cumulative effects where relevant. A modest increase in charges may have a different meaning for someone already affected by reduced transport, fewer local services and higher support costs. Each measure may look small in isolation, but the combined outcome can be significant.

Red flags in a council report

Certain weaknesses should prompt closer scrutiny. They don’t prove that a decision is unlawful, but they can show that the council hasn’t tested the proposal properly.

• The EIA appears after the decision date or carries a date that doesn’t match the report.
• It says “no impact” without explaining the evidence.
• It lists protected characteristics but doesn’t identify actual users or affected residents.
• It treats consultation as a tick-box exercise and gives no account of responses.
• It considers only the council’s preferred option.
• It offers mitigation without naming an owner, deadline or monitoring measure.
• It ignores indirect effects, accessibility or digital exclusion.
• It fails to consider the combined effect of related cuts.
• The financial case is detailed, but the equality analysis consists of a few general sentences.
• The recommendation doesn’t address important findings in the assessment.

A common problem is a report that describes equality as a separate appendix. The main decision may discuss savings, performance and risk, while the EIA sits untouched at the end. That separation makes it harder to see whether equality evidence affected the recommendation.

A council can pursue value for money and reduce unnecessary administration. Reform UK’s policy platform, for example, places emphasis on a leaner state, fewer burdens and public services focused on delivery rather than process. If a local proposal follows that direction, the Reform UK policy platform doesn’t remove the council’s legal duties. A staffing restructure or service reduction still needs a proper assessment of who may lose access or support.

How residents and councillors can challenge the decision

Begin with the published papers. Check the agenda, officer report, EIA, consultation record, equality data and minutes. Councils normally publish these on their committee or cabinet webpages.

Then compare the report with what happened. Did the assessment identify a risk that the decision-maker never discussed? Did councillors approve an option that differed from the one assessed? Was new information introduced at the meeting without time for proper consideration?

Specific questions are more effective than broad accusations. Ask:

• Which groups did the council assess?
• What evidence did it use?
• Why did it select this option over less harmful alternatives?
• What mitigation will be delivered?
• Who will monitor the result, and when will the council review it?
• Has the assessment been updated after consultation or changes to the proposal?

Councillors can raise these points during scrutiny, cabinet meetings, budget debates and call-in procedures, where the council’s constitution allows. Residents can submit written questions, respond to consultations, make complaints and contact their ward councillor.

If the issue concerns a failure to follow the law, a solicitor can advise on possible public law remedies. A legal challenge usually focuses on the council’s decision-making process, including whether it had due regard at the right time. The court won’t normally replace the council’s policy judgement with its own.

The Public Sector Equality Duty under the Equality Act 2010 provides further legal context for examining how public authorities make these decisions.

Conclusion

Testing an equality impact assessment means checking more than whether a form exists. The real questions are whether the council identified affected groups, used reliable evidence, considered alternatives, planned mitigation and gave equality proper attention before deciding.

A lean council can still be accountable, efficient and fair. Where a proposal claims to cut waste or improve value for money, the assessment should show who benefits, who carries the cost and what safeguards will apply. That evidence gives residents and councillors a clear basis for judging whether the decision deserves support or challenge.