Equality Outcomes and Mainstreaming Report 2015

Annex E - Scottish Government, Agencies and Other Bodies - Staff appraisal markings

The tables in this Annex show the performance appraisal markings broken down by diversity characteristics for Scottish Government staff who were due an appraisal for the period 1 April 2013 to 31 March 2014.

Coverage

Along with the core Scottish Government, the statistics in this annex include the following public bodies: Accountant in Bankruptcy, Advocate General for Scotland, British Irish Council, Courts Tribunals, Court of Lord Lyon, Crofting Commission, Disclosure Scotland, Education Scotland, HMI Constabulary, HMI Prisons, Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland, Local Government Boundary Commission for Scotland, Mental Welfare Commission, National Records of Scotland, Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator, Office of the Scottish Road Works Commissioner, Parole Board, Police Investigations & Review Commissioner, Risk Management Authority, Scotland Office, Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, Scottish Housing Regulator, Scottish Law Commission, Scottish Public Pensions Agency, Student Awards Agency for Scotland, Transport Scotland.

Appraisal markings

For the purposes of this report, the markings have been grouped into the following four categories:

• Exceptional
• Highly effective
• Effective and below - markings of 'effective', 'partly effective', and 'not effective'
• No marking - staff who were due an appraisal but have had no marking recorded on the HR system.

There were 16 members of staff who achieved a below effective performance marking in 2013-14. This number is too small to allow breakdowns by most protected characteristics. Below effective markings have therefore been grouped with 'effective' in this report.

Disclosure control

To avoid the possible disclosure of information about individual members of staff, data suppression has been applied to counts of less than 5 (and the corresponding percentage value). In some cases, secondary data suppression has been necessary to prevent the calculation of suppressed values by differencing. Suppressed values are shown as an asterisk (*). Where possible, data suppression has been avoided by grouping categories in some manner. Where the only small counts in a table refer to the 'prefer not to say' category, no data suppression is done. Where data suppression has been applied in any table an explanatory note is provided.

Data source

The tables in this workbook were compiled from data held on the Scottish Government HR system. Information on the protected characteristics (age, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability status, marital/civil partnership status, and religion or belief) is provided by the employee on a voluntary basis. For some protected characteristics (for example, age and gender) the information held is complete or very nearly complete, while the information held for other characteristics is less well populated.

Table E1: Appraisal markings 2013-14 by gender

								Counts and row percentages
	Exceptional		Highly Effective		Effective and below		No Marking		Total
Female	160	4.6%	1473	41.9%	1504	42.8%	378	10.8%	3515
Male	128	3.9%	1343	40.5%	1507	45.5%	334	10.1%	3312
All	288	4.2%	2816	41.2%	3011	44.1%	712	10.4%	6827

Table E2: Appraisal markings 2013-14 by age

								Counts and row percentages
	Exceptional		Highly Effective		Effective and below		No Marking		Total
16-29	23	3.6%	217	33.7%	350	54.3%	54	8.4%	644
30-39	86	4.6%	800	42.6%	803	42.8%	189	10.1%	1878
40-49	106	4.9%	975	45.5%	847	39.5%	217	10.1%	2145
50-54	40	3.9%	417	40.2%	472	45.5%	108	10.4%	1037
55-59	25	3.4%	290	39.1%	329	44.4%	97	13.1%	741
60+	8	2.1%	117	30.6%	210	55.0%	47	12.3%	382
All	288	4.2%	2816	41.2%	3011	44.1%	712	10.4%	6827

Table E3: Appraisal markings 2013-14 by disability

								Counts and row percentages
	Exceptional		Highly Effective		Effective and below		No Marking		Total
Disabled	10	3.3%	103	34.2%	169	56.1%	19	6.3%	301
Not disabled	194	4.9%	1747	44.2%	1634	41.3%	378	9.6%	3953
Prefer not to say	1	2.6%	15	39.5%	17	44.7%	5	13.2%	38
Not known	83	3.3%	951	37.5%	1191	47.0%	310	12.2%	2535
All	288	4.2%	2816	41.2%	3011	44.1%	712	10.4%	6827

No disclosure control has been applied to this table because the only small numbers are in the 'Prefer not to say' row.

Table E4: Appraisal markings 2013-14 by ethnic group

								Counts and row percentages
	Exceptional		Highly Effective		Effective and below		No Marking		Total
Ethnic minority	*	*	35	32.7%	59	55.1%	*	*	107
White	252	4.7%	2267	42.6%	2297	43.2%	504	9.5%	5320
Prefer not to say	*	*	45	43.3%	45	43.3%	*	*	104
Not known	31	2.4%	469	36.2%	610	47.1%	186	14.4%	1296
All	288	4.2%	2816	41.2%	3011	44.1%	712	10.4%	6827

Counts of less than 5 have been suppressed and shown as * to prevent the possible disclosure of information about individuals.
Secondary data suppression has also been necessary to prevent the calculation of the suppressed values by differencing (also shown as *).

Table E5: Appraisal markings 2013-14 by marital/civil partnership status

								Counts and row percentages
	Exceptional		Highly Effective		Effective and below		No Marking		Total
Civil Partnership	*	*	17	40.5%	*	*	*	*	42
Divorced	9	3.9%	78	34.1%	118	51.5%	24	10.5%	229
Domestic Partner	5	5.3%	45	47.9%	35	37.2%	9	9.6%	94
Legally Separated	*	*	6	50.0%	*	*	*	*	12
Living Together	8	6.4%	49	39.2%	58	46.4%	10	8.0%	125
Married	144	4.6%	1409	44.8%	1289	41.0%	302	9.6%	3144
Not Known	55	3.6%	564	37.4%	697	46.2%	193	12.8%	1509
Prefer not to say	11	3.0%	139	38.0%	171	46.7%	45	12.3%	366
Separated	*	*	20	28.6%	39	55.7%	*	*	70
Single	48	4.0%	472	39.8%	557	46.9%	110	9.3%	1187
Widowed	*	*	17	34.7%	23	46.9%	*	*	49
All	288	4.2%	2816	41.2%	3011	44.1%	712	10.4%	6827

Counts of less than 5 have been suppressed and shown as * to prevent the possible disclosure of information about individuals.
Secondary data suppression has also been necessary to prevent the calculation of the suppressed values by differencing (also shown as *).

Table E6: Appraisal markings 2013-14 by sexual orientation

								Counts and row percentages
	Exceptional		Highly Effective		Effective and below		No Marking		Total
Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual and other	6	4.7%	53	41.7%	59	46.5%	9	7.1%	127
Heterosexual/straight	125	4.5%	1149	41.1%	1293	46.3%	226	8.1%	2793
Prefer not to say	12	6.7%	70	38.9%	80	44.4%	18	10.0%	180
Not known	145	3.9%	1544	41.4%	1579	42.4%	459	12.3%	3727
All	288	4.2%	2816	41.2%	3011	44.1%	712	10.4%	6827

Table E7: Appraisal markings 2013-14 by religion or belief

								Counts and row percentages
	Exceptional		Highly Effective		Effective and below		No Marking		Total
Christian	55	4.4%	503	40.0%	605	48.1%	94	7.5%	1257
Other religion or belief	*	*	41	30.8%	76	57.1%	*	*	133
No religion or belief	64	4.3%	637	42.8%	652	43.8%	135	9.1%	1488
Prefer not to say	*	*	78	38.4%	93	45.8%	*	*	203
Not known	149	4.0%	1557	41.6%	1585	42.3%	455	12.1%	3746
All	288	4.2%	2816	41.2%	3011	44.1%	712	10.4%	6827

Counts of less than 5 have been suppressed and shown as * to prevent the possible disclosure of information about individuals.
Secondary data suppression has also been necessary to prevent the calculation of the suppressed values by differencing (also shown as *).

Table E8: Appraisal markings 2013-14 by work pattern

								Counts and row percentages
	Exceptional		Highly Effective		Effective and below		No Marking		Total
Full-time	244	4.3%	2380	41.6%	2509	43.8%	590	10.3%	5723
Part-time	44	4.0%	436	39.5%	502	45.5%	122	11.1%	1104
All	288	4.2%	2816	41.2%	3011	44.1%	712	10.4%	6827

Table E9: Appraisal markings 2013-14 by pay band

								Counts and row percentages
	Exceptional		Highly Effective		Effective and below		No Marking		Total
Band A	*	*	548	31.1%	1005	57.0%	*	*	1762
Band B	137	3.8%	1517	42.6%	1591	44.7%	316	8.9%	3561
Band C	102	8.2%	671	53.9%	320	25.7%	151	12.1%	1244
Other	*	*	80	30.8%	95	36.5%	*	*	260
All	288	4.2%	2816	41.2%	3011	44.1%	712	10.4%	6827

Counts of less than 5 have been suppressed and shown as * to prevent the possible disclosure of information about individuals.
Secondary data suppression has also been necessary to prevent the calculation of the suppressed values by differencing (also shown as *).

Table E10: Appraisal markings summary 2011-12 to 2013-14

								Counts and row percentages
	Exceptional		Highly Effective		Effective and below		No Marking		Total
2011-12	354	5.20%	2930	42.70%	3049	44.40%	533	7.80%	6866
2012-13	349	5.30%	2917	44.10%	2981	45.00%	375	5.70%	6622
2013-14	288	4.20%	2816	41.20%	3011	44.10%	712	10.40%	6827