Skip to main content

Promoting equality, diversity and inclusion

We are committed to supporting and promoting equality, diversity and inclusion.

We have an overarching EDI action plan running in tandem with our three-year Strategic Plan 2023-26.


We have set two equality objectives to progress our continued journey to drive forward EDI.

Objective 1: Develop our EDI leadership 

As an independent body overseeing regulation and registration and setting standards for organisations, we recognise we have an important role in championing EDI practice and outcomes. This is why our first equality objective is focused on developing our EDI leadership. We understand that developing our EDI leadership includes promoting EDI in our work and those we oversee. It also includes using our influence and convening powers to be timely, visible and current in responding to emerging and ‘new’ EDI issues, whist maintaining the profile of more longstanding and persistent EDI matters.

Our Strategic Plan sets out our aim to make regulation and registration better and fairer. In doing so it sets out our intention that by 2026 EDI indicators across the regulators and Accredited Registers show significant progress when compared to 2022/23.

Objective 2: Build an inclusive workplace

We recognise that creating and sustaining inclusive workplace practices requires continuous commitment and action. This is why our second equality objective focuses on driving forward EDI within the workplace and more specifically building and improving upon our existing inclusive practices.


PSA first self-assessment on equality, diversity and inclusion and reflections on progress made

We have published our first self-assessment on equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI). The purpose of the self-assessment was to evaluate where and how we can improve EDI outcomes in our own processes and in those we oversee.

To provide us with a structured and objective approach, we used the EDI Standard of Good Regulation. Our self-assessment was carried out between February and May 2024 and used a modified version of the Performance Review Standard 3 to make it more relevant to our work and functions. It reviewed our EDI performance from 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024.

We committed to assess ourselves robustly and objectively as part of our EDI action plan for 2023-24. Our intention was to demonstrate leadership by holding ourselves to account for the quality of our work on EDI. We also wanted to identify areas for improvement that would be taken forward in our EDI action plan for 2024-25.

Reflecting on progress made on EDI

The PSA Strategic Plan 2019-22 referred to the importance of: regulation protecting the most vulnerable; having a diverse staff team; and further improving organisational culture and upholding the values of the organisation (respect, fairness, integrity, transparency and teamwork). We also introduced our first EDI Standard of Good Regulation in 2019.

In September 2020, we set up our EDI Working Group – a staff-led group to support and promote EDI across the organisation and in those we oversee. In November 2020, we commissioned an independent EDI review that was completed in April 2021. The review findings pointed towards many positive aspects of our work that supported and demonstrated our commitment to EDI.  It also identified areas to work on in terms of strengthening the leadership of EDI; the analysis of EDI issues internally and externally; and a review of our people plans and HR practices. It specifically recommended establishing an EDI action plan. We published our first EDI action plan in spring 2022. We have now completed our 2022/23 and 2023/24 EDI action plans.

In our 2023-26 Strategic Plan, we have a strategic aim ‘to make regulation better and fairer’, which includes an objective ‘to promote and monitor equality, diversity and inclusion in our work and in those we oversee’. Over the past five years we have had a strong focus on EDI, our values, and creating a positive internal culture. In our most recent staff survey (November 2023), 92% of staff agreed with the statement, “I am treated fairly” and 97% agreed with the statement, “I am treated with respect”. We also had very positive responses to an additional survey on psychological safety in March 2024.

Our findings from the self-assessment

There have been many changes since our first EDI action plan was developed and we recognised these as we reviewed our performance over 2023-2024. 

Most notably, we have enhanced our expectations in relation to EDI for those we oversee. A new EDI standard designed to strengthen our approach to EDI within our accreditation programme was introduced to the Standards for Accredited Registers in May 2023. We also amended the requirements for meeting our EDI Standard of Good Regulation, making them more comprehensive, at the same time.

In addition, we now have clear equality objectives providing focus for our annual EDI action plans and there is a strong governance structure to embed EDI across the organisation. Other changes include the introduction of personal EDI objectives for all staff, supported by a wide range of professional development opportunities; annual collection and analysis of staff and Board diversity data; the introduction of an Associate Board Member to increase Board diversity; establishment of a larger senior management team to further improve diversity of thought in decision-making; and wider user of equality impact assessments.

Even with these numerous positive achievements, we have been deliberately self-critical in our approach to the self-assessment in order to drive further improvements. Our overall finding was that we do not yet fully meet all the expected outcomes of the EDI Standard of Good Regulation. We identified several opportunities for improvement. We need to be stronger in collecting and using EDI data across all our functions and we need to examine where there may be potential for bias in our procedures. We also want to be better at hearing public, patient and service user voices..

We believe our self-assessment was a rigorous, fair and candid reflection of where we are now regarding EDI. We publish our findings as part of our commitment to continuing progress on EDI. We will carry out a self-assessment again by April 2025, when we expect to report good performance against the Standard. We will publish the outcome of this in summer 2025.


Read our blogs

Race inequality in health and care. Who’s responsible?

Our report Safer care for all  launched at a Parliamentary reception on 6 September 2022. It highlights some of the biggest challenges affecting the quality and safety of health and social care across the UK today.

With the publication of Safer care for all, we started a debate on the issues highlighted in the report and the recommendations we put forward. As part of this debate, we are publishing a series of guest blogs written by stakeholders from across the sector. This blog is from Sam Rodger, Assistant Director, Policy and Strategy at the NHS Race and Health Observatory.


The NHS is for everyone, we are told. This is the promise of our most treasured national institution. The very first principle of the NHS constitution sets out a commitment to provide a comprehensive service, available to all, irrespective of a person’s protected characteristics. More than that, the NHS constitution outlines a “wider social duty to promote equality” through the services it provides. So, whose job is it to make this a reality?

 

Everybody’s job

The answer we often hear is that it’s everyone’s job. We’re told that considerations about racial and ethnic equality should be a ‘golden thread’ embedded in all discussions about healthcare. We are told that every policy decision should be underwritten by an Equality Impact Assessment. We are told that every member of staff in the NHS, from the CEO to each and every clinician, should be mindful of potential health inequalities, and should work to eliminate them where they find them.

This means each GP and practice manager should be thinking about ethnic health inequalities in their local population, and that individual nurses, receptionists, allied health professionals, and other members of staff should be culturally competent. It means that commissioners should be allocating funds according to the needs of our most marginalised communities, ensuring that nobody is left out of the great promise of an NHS for all.

More recently, we are told that the newly established Integrated Care Boards will have responsibility for taking a place-based population health approach to delivering services in an equitable way. The hope is that, by joining up the NHS with Local Authorities and other providers of essential services, we will make it impossible for the needs of marginalised communities to fall through the cracks, as has so often been the case in the past.

Nobody’s job

But what is happening on the ground? Is it realistic to expect NHS leaders to give their limited time and resources to race equity when they are under significantly more pressure to cut costs and reduce waiting times? Is it reasonable to expect members of staff – usually from ethnic minority communities themselves – to give their free time to the cause of achieving race equity?

As the old saying goes, when it’s everybody’s job, it’s nobody’s job. Across the system, we see a phenomenon whereby everyone thinks someone else should be responsible for making a difference. There’s not enough money, our leaders might say, to fund the extra community engagement required to properly cater services to our most vulnerable marginalised communities. I recently met a GP who claimed they would love to spend more time out in their local community fostering trust, but that they were already struggling to keep on top of the rising demand for consultations. And perhaps there wouldn’t be such a need to build this trust at a local level if cultural competence were considered at the outset of public health campaigns.

Part of the issue is accountability. Is anyone really held to account for delivering on race equity in the NHS? It is currently possible for a trust with among the lowest scores on the NHS Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES) to still be rated ‘Outstanding’ by the Care Quality Commission (CQC). What message does this send to Black, Asian and ethnic minority members of NHS staff? What message does it send to members of the public when leaders are not held to account for the continued poorer outcomes experienced by these communities?

In a similar fashion, the NHS announced in 2020 that each provider organisation in the NHS (including both trusts and ICSs) was required to appoint a board-level accountable lead for health inequalities. In our research on these appointments, we found a huge variation in the levels of support available to these leads, and in the amount of power they felt they had to effect change. Moreover, at a national level, it remains unclear who is responsible for ensuring that these appointments have been made, or who is responsible for holding them to account. This is particularly concerning given the lack of representation among ICS Chairs and Chief Executives.

Most concerningly of all, we have recently seen that the NHS has dropped targets in its planning guidance aimed at ensuring an organisation’s leadership reflected the racial diversity of its workforce.

Moving towards an equity culture

As we have seen repeatedly in the past, we are reaching a point where the NHS is under such significant strain that considerations about equity are becoming an afterthought. When targets around equity are forgotten, so too is the dream of an NHS that serves everyone equally and with dignity.  Exacerbating this is an increasing tendency for efforts to promote equity to be dismissed as ‘wokery’ by some media outlets and politicians.

In truth, equity should be everyone’s responsibility. It should be a fundamental tenet of every job description, policy document and target that the health sector produces. But if equity is ever to be more than a tick-box exercise, it must be embedded in a holistic framework of accountability.

For regulators, this likely means considering their internal processes first – ensuring that their fitness to practise procedures and their role in clinical education are free of bias. Then, it means considering how members of the health and care workforce are encouraged and supported to champion equity in their work, but also how they are held accountable for doing so. What, for example, is the role of revalidation and appraisal in making a difference?

Most importantly of all, we must all look beyond our individual roles and consider how each of us can contribute to a culture of equity. A culture is not just carefully chosen words, or a list of generic ‘values’ on a corporate website. A culture is formed of human interactions and behaviours. A culture is formed when people ask questions, when they listen to the views of others, when they speak out in a meeting, when they recognise their lived experience – privileged or not – may be at polar opposites from others in the room.

Accountability is the start of a journey towards health equity. But an equity culture must be the shared ambition of everyone in our health and care sector if we are to move forward.


Find out more

Read our full report Safer care for all - solutions from professional regulation and beyond  or through chapter 1 -  No more excuses - tackling inequalities. There are also shorter versions available, including the executive summary, you can download these versions here.

Find out more about the NHS Race and Health Observatory here


Get in touch

Please let us know if you need our material in other formats. Email info@professionalstandards.org.uk

PSA first self-assessment on equality, diversity and inclusion

We have published our first self-assessment on EDI. The purpose of the self-assessment was to evaluate where and how we can improve EDI outcomes in our own processes and in those we oversee. We've also reflected on the progress we have made to date. See opposite for more details.

No more excuses - tackling inequalities in health and care professional regulation

This is the first chapter in our report - Safer care for all: solutions from professional regulation and beyond we looked at the impact of inequalities on patients, service users and registrants, and on public confidence more widely. We also took a closer look at what professional regulation (and beyond) could do to tackle inequalities in health and care. 

We have held two events linked to this over the last year:

On 14 December 2023 more than 90 participants joined us online to explore whether health and care professionals in the UK should have an explicit responsibility in supporting action to address these disparities as they do in other countries. And, if so, whether regulators need to reinforce such a role through their training, standards and guidance.


We then started the new year off with a joint online seminar on tackling barriers to complaints with the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO). The event followed on the heels of an earlier in-person event with patient and service-user organisations held in Edinburgh in September 2023. 

The event brought together over 100 stakeholders from across the health and social care sector to discuss and explore the barriers that currently existing and can prevent patients and service uses from complaining. Along with our PHSO colleagues we wanted to share examples of innovative actions to widen and improve access to complaints services and to encourage and promote further joint work to tackle barriers to complaining. The event gave us much food for thought and we will look to continue this work in 2024/25.


You can find out more about both of these events here.