DOC

AugustSeptember

By Shawn Owens,2014-07-04 00:23
8 views 0
AugustSeptember

    DISABILITY EQUALITY SCHEME PUBLIC CONSULTATION

    Report from research

    carried out on behalf of

    Equal Opportunities Team

    August/September 2006

    Neil Martin

    Liverpool City Council

    Tel: 0151 225 2321

    Email: Neil.Martin@liverpool.gov.uk

    ______________________________________________________________

     LCC Market Research Team 04/07/2010 Page 1 of 63

    DISABILITY EQUALITY SCHEME PUBLIC CONSULTATION

    CONTENTS

    1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................... 3 2.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 6 2.1 Background .................................................................................................... 6 2.2 Objectives ....................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Methodology ................................................................................................... 7 3.0 MAIN FINDINGS ................................................................................................ 8 3.1 Respondents Profile ....................................................................................... 8 3.2 Getting Around Liverpool .............................................................................. 11 3.3 Information and Communication ................................................................... 14 3.4 Consultation .................................................................................................. 17 3.5 Accessible Housing ...................................................................................... 20 3.6 Employment with the Council ....................................................................... 22 3.7 Education...................................................................................................... 24 3.8 Supported Living (Social Services) ............................................................... 26 3.9 Leisure .......................................................................................................... 28 3.10 Disability Equality Scheme ........................................................................... 31 3.11 Further Comments ........................................................................................ 34 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................... 35

APPENDICES

A Marked Up Questionnaire (page: 39)

    B Covering Letter (page: 48)

    C Literal Comments (page: 52)

    ______________________________________________________________

     LCC Market Research Team 04/07/2010 Page 2 of 63

    DISABILITY EQUALITY SCHEME PUBLIC CONSULTATION

    1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The executive summary contains the findings of the quantitative survey,

    completed as part of the public consultation for the Disability Equality Scheme. It

    should be noted that all findings are based on a small sample and caution

    should be taken in applying the findings.

    ? Three quarters of respondents (32 out of 42) rated pavements in the city

    as being poor and over half of respondents (20 out of 42) rated signs as

    being poor. Improving pavements and signs were also seen as being

    effective ways to make it easier for disabled people to move around the

    city.

    ? Just under half of respondents (18 out of 38) rated street lighting in the

    city as being good, with a similar number (17 out of 38) also rating

    crossings as being good.

    ? Just under half of respondents (12 out of 26) suggested that the council

    should do more to improve access to its buildings for disabled people.

    ? Only one in four respondents (11 out of 42) had requested information in

    alternative formats with half of these respondents not receiving the

    information that they asked for.

    ? Just over half of respondents (14 out of 27) rated the service they

    received last time they contacted the Council as good, with just under

    half (12 out of 27) rating the service as poor, of which seven respondents

    (7 out of 27) rated the service as very poor.

    ? Over half of respondents (23 out of 42) felt that the council does not

    make it easy for disabled people to get involved in consultation, with less

    than one quarter (10 out of 42) believing that it does.

    ? Of those respondents who had taken part in any consultation run by the

    Council, half (5 out of 10) felt that the information was not clear and easy

    to understand and only two respondents (2 out of 10) received any

    feedback.

    ? Respondents suggested that the council publicise consultation exercises

    more, spend more time visiting people to get their views and do more to

    demonstrate that they are actually listening to what is being said and

    acting on it.

    ? Over half of respondents (23 out of 41) stated that they need accessible

    housing, however only six tenths (13 out of 22) had applied for it. Those

    ______________________________________________________________

     LCC Market Research Team 04/07/2010 Page 3 of 63

    DISABILITY EQUALITY SCHEME PUBLIC CONSULTATION

    not applying felt that this was because they did not have enough

    information or did not know how to.

? There was an even split amongst those respondents who had been re-

    housed to accessible housing, with three respondents (3 out of 7) feeling

    that they had been adequately consulted and the same number (3 out of

    7) feeling that they had not.

? Respondents suggested that the council should offer more choice to

    people who need accessible housing (types of properties, locations, and

    shared ownership) and improve processes to make it easier for them to

    apply. Two thirds of respondents (14 out of 20) indicated that they would

    prefer to stay in their current home and receive adaptations as opposed

    to being re-housed somewhere else.

? One third of respondents (14 out of 42) had applied for a job with

    Liverpool City Council in the past, however none had applied in the last

    12 months. Respondents were most satisfied with the job advertisement

    (7 out of 12) and most dissatisfied with the application form (4 out of 11)

    and feedback process (4 out of 11).

? Three tenths of respondents (7 out of 25) suggested that the council

    should provide more support and be more prepared to adapt to make it

    easier for disabled people to get a job. It was also suggested that

    interviewers should concentrate more on abilities and treat disabled

    people the same as other candidates.

? Only 7 out of 39 respondents had been on an education or training

    course provided by the Council in the last 12 months. Of those who had

    four out of six respondents were satisfied with the service they received.

? Only 6 out of 41 respondents had visited any Council run day centres in

    the last 12 months, with one respondent very satisfied, one very

    dissatisfied and three respondents neither satisfied nor dissatisfied.

? Just over one third of respondents (14 out of 40) had used a Council

    sports centre in the last 12 months with the majority (11 out of 14)

    satisfied with the service they received.

? Over half of respondents (12 out of 22) suggested that more accessible

    facilities and equipment should be provided to improve the service

    offered in sports centres.

? Just over four tenths of respondents (17 out of 40) had used a Council

    library in the last 12 months, with over eight tenths (14 out of 17) satisfied

    with the service they received.

    ______________________________________________________________

     LCC Market Research Team 04/07/2010 Page 4 of 63

    DISABILITY EQUALITY SCHEME PUBLIC CONSULTATION

    ? Just under six tenths of respondents (20 out of 35) felt that the draft

    Scheme document is clearly written and easy to understand and just over

    four tenths of respondents (14 out of 33) felt that it would improve the

    way that the council provides services to and for disabled people.

    ? One in four respondents (4 out of 17) suggested that the document

    should be made more user friendly, while other popular suggestions

    included making the document shorter, providing an executive summary

    and visiting people to explain what the document means.

    ? Four respondents (4 out of 10) felt that the best way to improve the

    scheme was to listen to disabled people and adapt services.

    ______________________________________________________________

     LCC Market Research Team 04/07/2010 Page 5 of 63

    DISABILITY EQUALITY SCHEME PUBLIC CONSULTATION

    2.0 INTRODUCTION

    2.1 Background

    Liverpool City Council is currently developing its Disability Equality Scheme,

    which must be published by December 2006. The Disability Discrimination Act

    2005 introduced the publication of a Scheme, which is a legal requirement of all

    public sector bodies.

The legal Duty requires all public sector bodies to:

    ? promote equality of opportunity between disabled persons and other

    persons

    ? eliminate discrimination that is unlawful under the Act

    ? eliminate harassment of disabled persons that is related to their

    disabilities

    ? promote positive attitudes towards disabled persons

    ? encourage participation by disabled persons in public life

    ? take steps to take account of disabled persons‟ disabilities, even where

    that involves treating disabled persons more favourably than other

    persons.

This new duty is a move away from merely providing „reasonable adjustments‟

    or responding to individual complaints, but requires the council to adopt a

    proactive approach to mainstreaming disability equality into all decisions and

    activities. It is recognised that this can only be achieved through full and proper

    consultation with, and involvement of disabled people.

This report provides the results from a quantitative survey with disabled people

    from across the City, linked to the overall Disability Equality Scheme

    consultation programme. It is intended that the results from this survey and both

    public qualitative research project and disabled employee survey will be used to

    inform and develop the Disability Equality Scheme. The results will also be used

    to produce an action plan that reflects the strategic priorities of both the council

    and local disabled people.

    2.2 Objectives

    The primary aims of this consultation were to:

    ? Explore experiences of accessing Council services amongst disabled

    people across Liverpool

    ? Generate ideas regarding how LCC could improve its services, or provide

    them differently, using the Disability Equality Scheme to better meet the

    needs of disabled people.

    The key objectives can be defined as:

    ______________________________________________________________

     LCC Market Research Team 04/07/2010 Page 6 of 63

    DISABILITY EQUALITY SCHEME PUBLIC CONSULTATION

    ? Measuring perceptions of the Council and Council Services.

    ? Measuring satisfaction with a range of Council Services.

    ? Establishing opportunities for the Council to provide services differently

    or improve in order to meet the needs of people with a range of

    impairments.

    ? Measuring satisfaction with the draft Disability Equality Scheme.

    ? Identifying ways in which the Scheme can be improved.

    2.3 Methodology

    A quantitative methodology was used for the consultation, with the aim being to

    consult with as many disabled people and organisations representing disabled

    people as possible in the City and provide them with the opportunity to have

    their say both on the way that Council services are currently provided and on

    the contents of the Disability Equality Scheme.

Copies of the consultation pack (questionnaire and draft Scheme document)

    were sent to all 282 organisations within the LCN (Liverpool Community

    Network) Disability Thematic Network. The questionnaire and Scheme

    document were also posted on the Council‟s website and a hotline was set up

    for people to request copies of the pack. Publicity was achieved using a number

    of methods, including press releases (an article was run within I Can Do That in

    the Liverpool Echo), an email briefing to all members of LCN and through

    displaying leaflets and posters promoting the consultation within Council

    buildings.

Alternative versions of all of the documents within the consultation pack were

    also produced in Braille and on Audio (tape and CD). A translation panel

    explaining that the documents could be translated into all local languages was

    also added to the cover letters that were sent out (Appendix B).

The consultation remained open for six weeks.

    2.3.1 Statistical Reliability

    A total of 42 surveys were returned (11 electronically and 31 by post). Given the

    nature of this consultation and the fact that we approached organisations

    representing local disabled people within the City, no specific sample was

    defined. The low number of responses means that the results are not necessarily representative of the city’s disabled community however and

    all results should be treated with caution.

This report contains several tables and figures that show the survey results. In

    some instances, the responses do not add up to 100%. There are several

    reasons why this might happen: the question may ask the respondent to give

    more than one answer; or individual percentages may be rounded to the

    nearest whole number such that the total comes to 99% or 101%.

    ______________________________________________________________

     LCC Market Research Team 04/07/2010 Page 7 of 63

    DISABILITY EQUALITY SCHEME PUBLIC CONSULTATION

    3.0 MAIN FINDINGS

    This section of the report contains the main findings from the survey. The

    results from the questionnaire are shown in a series of charts with

    accompanying analysis. Differences in response based on the respondents‟

    demographics have not been highlighted in the analysis as the low number of

    responses means that any differences cannot be viewed as being significant.

    Comments made on the questionnaire are contained in Appendix C. Selected

    comments have also been included in this section and are analysed along with

    the survey results.

    3.1 Respondents Profile

    3.1.1 Age

    Chart 1: Respondents distribution by age? (Q 47)

    Base: 41 respondents

    14

    12

    10

    8

    6

    4

    2

    0Under 1920 - 3435 - 4950 - 6465+

    1713137Series1

    There was a reasonable spread of responses to the survey in terms of ages,

    with just under one third of respondents (13 out of 41) aged between 35 and 49

    and the same number aged between 50 and 64. Further consultation with young

    disabled people is planned for the future.

    3.1.2 Gender

    Table 1: Respondents distribution by gender? (Q 48)

    Base: 41 respondents

    Gender Number of respondents

    Male 22

    Female 19

    There was a fairly even split in responses amongst males and females with

    slightly more males (22 out of 41) responding than females (19 out of 41).

    ______________________________________________________________

     LCC Market Research Team 04/07/2010 Page 8 of 63

    DISABILITY EQUALITY SCHEME PUBLIC CONSULTATION

    3.1.3 Disability

    Table 2: Respondents distribution by disability? (Q 49)

    Base: 41 respondents

Disability? Number of respondents

    Yes 31 No 9 Don‟t Know 1

Three quarters of respondents (31 out of 41) consider themselves to be a

    disabled person. Those answering no have not been excluded from the analysis

    for two reasons:

    1. The respondents may have one or more impairments but do not consider

    they are disabled; and

    2. Some of the respondents were completing the survey on behalf of one or

    more individuals who may consider themselves disabled.

    3.1.4 Ethnic origin

    Table 3: Respondents distribution by ethnic origin? (Q 50)

    Base: 42 respondents

Ethnic Background Number of respondents

    White British 33 White Irish 1 White Other 1 Chinese 1 Nigerian 1 Indian 1 Asian British 1 Prefer not to say 3

Just under four fifths of respondents (33 out of 42) were White British, with the

    remaining respondents White Irish, White Other, Chinese, Nigerian, Indian or

    Asian British (all 1 respondent each). Three respondents indicated that they did

    not wish to disclose this information.

    ______________________________________________________________

     LCC Market Research Team 04/07/2010 Page 9 of 63

    DISABILITY EQUALITY SCHEME PUBLIC CONSULTATION

    3.1.4 Home ownership

    Chart 2: Respondents distribution by home ownership? (Q 16)

    Base: 41 respondents

30

    25

    20

    15

    10

    5

    0Rent from Rent from private Own your homeRent from councilOtherHA/Trustlandlord

    252437Series1

    Six tenths of respondents (25 out of 41) owned their own home, with only two respondents (2 out of 41) renting from the council. Those respondents answering other included: three respondents living at home with their parents; two respondents living in residential homes; one respondent living with their carers; and one response on behalf of an organisation whose members lived in a variety of tenures.

    ______________________________________________________________

     LCC Market Research Team 04/07/2010 Page 10 of 63

Report this document

For any questions or suggestions please email
cust-service@docsford.com