Stage 3 – Assessment and Improvement
11. What options could strengthen this programme/policy/decision in terms of its impacts on inequalities of outcome?
Our policy will provide tangible recognition for survivors. We have taken into account everything previously outlined in this document including non-financial redress, access to funded, independent legal advice and assistance with gathering evidence to meet the evidence requirements of the scheme. We intend to develop a robust awareness raising campaign that will be as accessible as possible. Potential barriers to applying will be closely monitored throughout implementation and the opening of the scheme.
12. What are the pros and cons of these options?
We are aware of the potential difficulties that survivors may face throughout this process. We intend to continue to learn from other schemes and relevant research on the subject of trauma, as well as utilising the experience of experts and survivors, and evaluating the current support services available. This will help ensure we design and deliver. From the outset we will build formal links with a Survivor Forum to help us monitor and review the delivery of the scheme.
13. How could the programme/policy/decision be adjusted to address inequalities associated with particular groups? Particular communities of interest or communities of place who are more at risk of inequalities of outcome?
As indicated above, there are potentially a number of different 'groups', each with distinct issues of equality of access and engagement with the scheme. We will strive to maintain effective working relationships with relevant networks and ensure robust monitoring and evaluation arrangements are in place.
There is a problem
Thanks for your feedback