Equality and Human Rights Mainstreaming strategy: consultation analysis

6. Utilising Evidence and Experience

This chapter presents the analysis of responses to questions about the fourth driver set out in the consultation paper: using evidence and lived experience to improve policy development. It is anticipated that this will support innovation and adaptation by examining evidence, data and context at individual, organisational and service levels. Involving those directly impacted, including those in marginalised communities, through active and meaningful engagement was highlighted as an important part of the process.

Q13. Do you agree that utilising evidence and experience is a key driver of mainstreaming equality and human rights?

Among those answering Q13, 92% agreed that utilising evidence and experience is a key driver for mainstreaming equality and human rights; 4% disagreed, and 4% were unsure. All organisations agreed with this key driver, compared to 68% of individuals.

Reasons for agreement

Just under two thirds of respondents commented at Q13. Many highlighted the importance of evidence for mainstreaming equality and human rights. It was noted that this could support evidence-based policy, informed decision-making, identify unfairness and challenges, monitor progress, measure impact and effectiveness, and build credibility. Several respondents added that the need for evidence is well captured in the Strategy.

Many respondents raised the importance of including lived experience as a key driver for mainstreaming equality and human rights. They detailed how lived experience voices can provide valuable real-world insights to support the development of fit-for-purpose policies and can identify areas that are functioning well or where improvement is needed. This theme was also noted by several respondents at Q14.

Suggestions for data collection and lived experience approaches

Several respondents commented on data collection methods. A range of perspectives was highlighted, including collecting both qualitative and quantitative data and taking a variety of engagement approaches. Some respondents raised suggestions and considerations for including lived experience, which they felt should be present at all stages of the policymaking process; this is covered in detail under Q15.

Need for more information

Some respondents requested more information and clarity on the proposed approach. This included questions about resourcing, the role of academia, the methods of learning from lived experience, sharing of evidence, information on the crossover between adult and children and young people’s rights, and how disaggregated intersectional equality data will inform the Strategy.

Other comments

Respondents provided other suggestions and considerations. Some respondents provided examples of lived experience engagement. These included the ALLIANCE facilitating lived experience panels that contribute to Scottish Government work and YouthLink Scotland’s networks to gather young people's experiences. Respondents noted the increased interest in lived experience participation, the potential to use existing organisational networks to find lived experience, and the benefits of this approach. Some respondents also noted examples of existing evidence and data, such as approaches taken overseas or within their organisation.

Comments on resourcing were made by some. Most highlighted the need for sufficient resourcing for evidence gathering and lived experience panels and for local-level resourcing to undertake engagements. Conversely, two respondents expressed the view that money could be better spent on service improvement or redirected to other areas.

Gaps in the existing data and the opportunity to collect evidence to address them were noted. Some respondents highlighted the need to take action, such as through using a future-focused evidence-based approach, ensuring that work being undertaken leads to better outcomes, and establishing a cross-organisational group to shape toolkit inputs.

Q14. Have we captured the core elements of utilising evidence and experience within the context of mainstreaming?

Just over half (53%) of those answering Q14 felt that the Strategy captured the core elements of utilising evidence and experience in the context of mainstreaming, while 34% did not and 14% were unsure. Over one third of individuals (36%) were satisfied with the details provided, compared to 59% of organisations. At least half of most types of organisations felt the core elements had been captured, except for equality advocacy organisations (42%) and among the small number of justice organisations (25%).

Need for more information

Just over half of respondents left a comment at Q14. Many respondents highlighted the need for more information in the Strategy, which limited their ability to respond to this question. More information was requested on what data is required and how it will be used, how lived experience panels would work in practice, outcomes, resourcing, and possible analysis methodologies. Other requests included providing greater clarity and detail such as for terms like effective engagement, including best practice examples, and improving the availability of local-level data.

Several respondents highlighted the need for more information on capacity, funding and resource allocation in relation to evidence gathering, including where there would be limitations. Specifically, a few respondents highlighted the need to pay people who are willing to contribute their time to lived experience engagements.

Positive comments and recognition of challenges

Positive comments were made by several respondents. Where more detail was given, these respondents felt that the core elements of utilising evidence and experience within the context of mainstreaming were captured and clear in the Strategy and that nothing was missing. General support for the capturing of evidence and experience was also highlighted. Some respondents thought that the challenges in data collection and analysis had been recognised, as were the gaps in the current evidence base and the need for further work to address these challenges.

Intersectionality and disaggregation

Some respondents commented on the need for intersectional data and analysis, such as for sex and gender, to better understand the impact of policies on different groups. Challenges in the collection, analysis and reporting of intersectional equality data, as identified in the Strategy, were also recognised by respondents. A small number of comments detailed a desire for disaggregated data i.e. data sets that can be broken down into smaller, more specific categories or segments. It was suggested that disaggregated data should be made available as standard, as this could allow for a more detailed analysis.

Q15. What actions would you recommend to ensure that utilising evidence and experience as outlined will contribute to the achievement of mainstreaming?

Improvements to lived experience engagements

Seven in ten respondents commented at Q15. Many respondents suggested actions and considerations for lived experience engagement. Ensuring a variety of voices are heard was highlighted; this included, for example, seldom-heard groups, people with HIV, disabled people, the elderly and unpaid carers. The need to value, have a clear use for, and give feedback on, the use of lived experience data to those who contributed was also highlighted. Suggested ways to improve engagement included having a continuous engagement mechanism, expanding the use of lived experience panels to include ongoing consultations, not solely relying on panels, using lived experience champions, and taking a non-tokenistic approach.

Some respondents noted adjustments that could be made, or need to be considered, to ensure lived experience engagement is accessible. This includes ensuring accessibility in terms of language used in meetings, additional support needs, translation and interpretation services, mobility support, information in accessible formats, transport to and from events for disabled people, accessible venues, and participation options in different formats (e.g. online, in-person). The need for resourcing to achieve this was noted.

The need to address consultation fatigue and duplication across lived experience engagement was also noted. Suggested mitigations included having clear communication, increasing resources for the third sector, sharing findings, following best practice engagement, and having feedback mechanisms to ensure findings are used.

Improvements to data collection

Many respondents suggested a range of improvements to data collection, analysis, and infrastructure. In terms of improving the existing data infrastructure, there were calls to identify evidence gaps and use existing evidence and resources, which may minimise duplication and mitigate current IT and data system limitations. Data linking, using advanced analytical tools and techniques, conducting systematic data gathering, and using monitoring and evaluation frameworks and indicators were also suggested.

Several commented on the need for capacity building and training to ensure that people working in the public sector have the right skills to complete this work. This includes an understanding of trauma-informed practice, equality data and intersectional analysis.

Other comments

Several respondents highlighted the need to share any evidence collected. Respondents highlighted that reporting needs to be clear, accessible, and transparent, and one respondent suggested having real-time reporting. Cross-sector collaboration was highlighted by some respondents; this is explored in detail in Chapter 8.

Several other actions were suggested by one or two respondents each. These included involving academic advisors in evidence gathering, having a policy or system-level commitment to using evidence, regularly updating the Equality Evidence strategy with stakeholder input, and adopting a continuous improvement model.