Q21. Do you agree or disagree that the draft performance framework is right to help ensure that we understand the progress we are making?
Fifty-nine respondents answered Q21. Of those, more than half (58%) agreed, 12% disagreed, and 30% neither agreed nor disagreed (see table 7 below).
Table 7: Q21. Do you agree or disagree that the draft performance framework is right to help ensure that we understand the progress we are making?
|Neither Agree nor Disagree||30%||18|
|N = 59|
Support for the performance framework
Please tell us about any sections of the draft performance framework that you are supportive of
Thirty-six respondents provided an answer to this question.
Twelve respondents stated they were supportive of all of the performance framework, and an additional 17 respondents provided generally supportive comments, including:
- Support for the 'general thrust' or the 'overall focus and desired outcomes' of the framework
- Support for the use of a logic model approach, showing how short, medium and long term outcomes are linked
- Welcoming that the framework has been streamlined to a small number of indicators
- Recognising that it is very difficult to find performance measures, and that the ones identified seem appropriate
- Highlighting the benefits of collecting information at a national level that can be broken down at local authority level, so that local authorities can compare themselves to one another and to the national picture
Specific elements of the performance framework that respondents said they were particularly supportive of were:
- Primary prevention (9). These respondents particularly welcomed the focus on monitoring societal-level changes in understanding of, and attitudes towards, violence against women, and of wider measures of gender equality such as the earnings of male and female employees.
- Services for women and children (6). These respondents supported the early identification of women and children affected by violence; welcomed the inclusion of indicators on referrals to specialist support services, and self-reported improvements in feelings of safety and wellbeing; and stated that it is positive that the impact of training is monitored in relation to behavioural as well as attitudinal change.
- Perpetrators (2). The respondents welcomed the emphasis on perpetrators being identified early, and on supporting perpetrators and sanctioning them to reduce the violence.
Suggestions for changes to the performance framework
Is there anything you think is missing? / Do you have any suggestions for additions to the draft performance framework?
Forty-five respondents provided an answer to this question.
The following suggestions were made in relation to the 'society' elements of the performance framework:
- Changing "gender norms and expectations are reduced" to something more specific e.g. "fewer people adhere to gender stereotypes"
- Indicator on percentage of women in senior roles other than elected member roles e.g. judiciary, senior police officers, public body chief executives.
- Extend the indicators that refer directly to pay and vertical segregation within local authorities to all public sector bodies (and perhaps all sectors of the economy), and disaggregate by disability and ethnicity.
- Demographic breakdown of attitudinal data
- Report data on public awareness, myths and stereotypical views at a local level
- Outcome along the lines of "Men in Scottish society feel supported to have a positive mindset towards women and children and are empowered to reject all violent and misogynist thinking"
- Indicator relating to the amount of internet pornography consumed
- Indicator(s) on incidents of misogyny or sexism
- Indicator(s) on young people's experience of sexual harassment (to assess girls' and young women's sense of safety and well-being and provide an early indicator of societal change)
- Indicator on how safe women feel in their communities.
The following suggestions were made in relation to the 'perpetrators' elements of the performance framework:
- Extend 'Men desist...' to 'Men and Boys desist.....'
- Monitor availability of, and waiting times for, perpetrator programmes
- Monitor number and percentage of perpetrators who successfully complete perpetrator intervention programmes, and how many do/do not go on re-offend.
- Number of men convicted of VAWG related crimes - provide a breakdown of what convictions are for.
Women and children affected by violence
The following suggestions were made in relation to the 'women and children affected by violence' elements of the performance framework:
- Number (both nationally and locally) of Independent Domestic Abuse Advocates (Idaas), outreach workers, health-based specialists and refuge spaces available.
- Percentage of local authority Housing Options Hubs trained in gender based violence/gendered approaches to homelessness prevention
- Recognition that many women never report, or report only when it becomes unbearable, and so would not be counted in the measure 'proportion reporting to the police within 12 months of experiencing a type of gender based violence'. Support services will often have contact with women who do not report and will be safety planning and providing support should they decide to leave.
- Need clarity on whether 'number of women and children identified as being affected by VAWG who are referred to a specialist support service' will include self-referrals
- Number of referrals from one public agency to another public agency for vulnerable women, young people and children as a result of domestic violence, gender based violence or hate crime.
- Number of women rehomed temporarily and permanently as a result of domestic violence.
- Record victims' perception of 1) their risk, 2) their safety before and after the intervention, 3) the response of services 4) attitudinal change of responders.
- Safety and wellbeing outcomes of survivors accessing public sector services, not specialist services
- Proportion of children experiencing domestic abuse
- Proportion of girls and children who have experienced sexual abuse in last 12 months
A number of respondents felt that more information needed to be provided in relation to the measurement framework, including:
- More detailed definitions of the indicators
- Evidence sources, who will gather the data, and where and when the data will be reported
- What the baseline will be
- A clearer link between the actions in the delivery plan and the outcomes/indicators in the performance framework - including what outcomes we might reasonably expect in the 5 year timeframe of the action plan.
It was also suggested that the performance framework should identify where there are gaps in what it is currently possible to monitor, with specific commitments in the delivery plan as to when and how these gaps will be addressed. One respondent proposed:
"An additional action for Equally Safe might be the development for Scotland of a rigorous framework for measuring violence against women and children, along the lines of recently published work by Professor Sylvia Walby and colleagues."
- Third Sector
Two respondents highlighted the need to integrate or align the Equally Safe performance framework with existing frameworks and measures, including the National Performance Framework for Scotland and the National Health and Social Care Standards. And two respondents queried why service providers / professionals were not explicitly included as a target group.
One respondent sought clarity on whether the 'funding invested in preventing and eradicating VAWG at a local level' indicator included not only direct spend, but wider human resources or other assets utilised to progress this agenda. This respondent also cautioned that percentage of expenditure should not be an indicator, as the focus should be on the quality and sustainable of outcomes delivered and best value for action.
Some respondents raised challenges that data collection and performance monitoring posed, and some suggestions for how to resolve them:
- All services gather data differently, which makes identifying the prevalence of VAWG locally challenging
- Need to develop common data points and harmonise the approach to collation of equalities data
- A strong driver is needed from both the Scottish Government and COSLA that collecting and reporting data on the indicators is expected from all organisations who contribute to Equally Safe
- Actual results 'on the ground' are preferable to statistical best performance figures which really do not address the problem
- A more qualitative approach to the collection of information e.g. case studies in order to fully understanding the complexity of individual experiences and related outcomes
- There is a focus on Local Authorities and a similar set of objectives and outcomes could be considered for other public services
- Measuring societal attitudes to monitor the difference made / change in attitudes or beliefs held is an ongoing challenge
- At a local level, consideration will have to be given to additional performance measures, based on local priorities and action plans
Many respondents raised issues that have already been described in the 'recurring themes raised throughout the consultation' section of this report, and will therefore not be described in detail here. Specific suggestions for the performance framework relating to these recurring themes included:
- Disaggregation of data by age / including data on children and young people
- Including indicators measuring prevalence and quality of Relationships, Sexual Health and Parenthood ( RSHP) education in all types of schools
- Including indicators relating to prevalence of Child Sexual Abuse and Exploitation
- Indicators to measure online gender abuse, honour based violence, number of people paying for sexual services and number of people in prostitution
- Disaggregation of data by protected characteristic - such as ethnicity, disability and sexuality ( LGBT).
- Monitoring provision of accessible information and appropriate communication tools to both victims and perpetrators
- Monitoring actions to challenge negative attitudes regarding the sexuality of people with learning disabilities.
Email: Bruce Sutherland
Telephone: Central Enquiries Unit, 0300 244 4000