Transparency data
(CSV) Performance markings - DWP equality information 2013 (data)
Updated 28 August 2014
Download CSV 11 KB
| 19. Performance markings | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Not set | |||||
| Data source: | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Resource Management. | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Time period and availability: | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Latest data as at 31 March 2013. | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| What does this tell us? | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| The data presented here shows the proportion of employees awarded each performance marking against their status in relation to each of the following protected characteristics: age; disability; ethnicity; and gender. In the current performance management marking system employees are categorised as 'Exceeded', 'Achieved' and 'Must Improve'. Employees who were not awarded a marking for the 2012 / 13 performance year have been omitted from this data. | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| How will an improvement be shown? | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Generally the similarity of this indicator between groups will indicate equivalent behaviour. However, this will require a reasonably complete declaration rate and sufficiently large volumes to be precise. It should also be considered that females represent over two thirds of DWP's current employee headcount. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Table 19.1: Percentage of performance mark awarded by age in relation to overall number of performance markings given 1, 2, 3, 5 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Age | % Exceeded | % Achieved | % Must improve | % No mark required | % Total |
| Not set | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 |
| 16-24 | 1.2 | 1.1 | 1.7 | 9.4 | 1.2 |
| 25-29 | 5.7 | 4.5 | 4.2 | 14.4 | 4.7 |
| 30-34 | 9.9 | 8 | 6.2 | 23.6 | 8.3 |
| 35-39 | 11.2 | 9.6 | 7.9 | 21.8 | 9.9 |
| 40-44 | 17.4 | 14 | 10.8 | 12.4 | 14.4 |
| 45-49 | 22.7 | 19.4 | 17.5 | 9.7 | 19.9 |
| 50-54 | 18.6 | 20 | 19.2 | 2.7 | 19.6 |
| 55-59 | 10.5 | 14.8 | 17.8 | 3.6 | 14.1 |
| 60-64 | 2.6 | 7 | 11.5 | 1.8 | 6.4 |
| 65+ | 0.4 | 1.7 | 3.3 | * | 1.5 |
| Total | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| Not set | |||||
| Source: Resource Management | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Notes: 1. Data as at 31 March 2013. 2. * - Level of data too low for publication and percentages are rounded to 1 decimal place, given this totals may not sum due to rounding. 3. Percentages shown are the number of employees awarded a performance marking by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees awarded a performance marking who have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. 4. Percentages shown are the number of employees awarded a performance marking by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees that have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. 5. This data does not include the SCS or employees who have not been awarded a marking. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Table 19.2: Percentage of performance mark awarded by age in relation to total number of employees in that group 1, 2, 4, 5 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Age | % Exceeded | % Achieved | % Must improve | % No mark required | % Total |
| Not set | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 |
| 16-24 | 19.2 | 68.1 | 9.2 | 3.6 | 100 |
| 25-29 | 23.4 | 69.5 | 5.7 | 1.4 | 100 |
| 30-34 | 23.4 | 70.4 | 4.9 | 1.3 | 100 |
| 35-39 | 22.3 | 71.5 | 5.2 | 1 | 100 |
| 40-44 | 23.6 | 71.1 | 4.9 | 0.4 | 100 |
| 45-49 | 22.4 | 71.7 | 5.7 | 0.2 | 100 |
| 50-54 | 18.6 | 74.9 | 6.4 | 0.1 | 100 |
| 55-59 | 14.6 | 77 | 8.2 | 0.1 | 100 |
| 60-64 | 8.1 | 80 | 11.8 | 0.1 | 100 |
| 65+ | 4.6 | 81.3 | 13.9 | * | 100 |
| All Age Groups | 19.6 | 73.4 | 6.5 | 0.5 | 100 |
| Not set | |||||
| Source: Resource Management | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Notes: 1. Data as at 31 March 2013. 2. * - Level of data too low for publication and percentages are rounded to 1 decimal place, given this totals may not sum due to rounding. 3. Percentages shown are the number of employees awarded a performance marking by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees awarded a performance marking who have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. 4. Percentages shown are the number of employees awarded a performance marking by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees that have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. 5. This data does not include the SCS or employees who have not been awarded a marking. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Table 19.3: Percentage of performance mark awarded by indicated disability in relation to overall number of performance markings given 1, 2, 3, 5 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Disability | % Exceeded | % Achieved | % Must improve | % No mark required | % Total |
| Not set | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 |
| Disabled | 4.6 | 6.6 | 10.2 | 5.4 | 6.4 |
| Non-Disabled | 95.4 | 93.4 | 89.8 | 94.6 | 93.6 |
| Total Declared | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| Not set | |||||
| Source: Resource Management | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Notes: 1. Data as at 31 March 2013. 2. * - Level of data too low for publication and percentages are rounded to 1 decimal place, given this totals may not sum due to rounding. 3. Percentages shown are the number of employees awarded a performance marking by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees awarded a performance marking who have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. 4. Percentages shown are the number of employees awarded a performance marking by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees that have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. 5. This data does not include the SCS or employees who have not been awarded a marking. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Table 19.4: Percentage of performance mark awarded by indicated disability in relation to total number of employees in that group 1, 2, 4, 5 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Disability | % Exceeded | % Achieved | % Must improve | % No mark required | %Total |
| Not set | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 |
| Disabled | 14.2 | 75.4 | 10.2 | 0.3 | 100 |
| Non-Disabled | 20 | 73.5 | 6.1 | 0.3 | 100 |
| Total Declared | 19.6 | 73.6 | 6.4 | 0.3 | 100 |
| Not set | |||||
| Source: Resource Management | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Notes: 1. Data as at 31 March 2013. 2. * - Level of data too low for publication and percentages are rounded to 1 decimal place, given this totals may not sum due to rounding. 3. Percentages shown are the number of employees awarded a performance marking by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees awarded a performance marking who have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. 4. Percentages shown are the number of employees awarded a performance marking by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees that have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. 5. This data does not include the SCS or employees who have not been awarded a marking. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Table 19.5: Percentage of performance mark awarded by indicated ethnicity in relation to overall number of performance markings given 1, 2, 3, 5 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Ethnicity | % Exceeded | % Achieved | % Must improve | % No mark required | % Total |
| Not set | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 |
| Ethnic minority | 9 | 11.4 | 15.4 | 24.6 | 11.2 |
| White | 91 | 88.6 | 84.6 | 75.4 | 88.8 |
| Total Declared | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| Not set | |||||
| Source: Resource Management | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Notes: 1. Data as at 31 March 2013. 2. * - Level of data too low for publication and percentages are rounded to 1 decimal place, given this totals may not sum due to rounding. 3. Percentages shown are the number of employees awarded a performance marking by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees awarded a performance marking who have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. 4. Percentages shown are the number of employees awarded a performance marking by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees that have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. 5. This data does not include the SCS or employees who have not been awarded a marking. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Table 19.6: Percentage of performance mark awarded by indicated ethnicity in relation to total number of employees in that group 1, 2, 4, 5 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Ethnicity | % Exceeded | % Achieved | % Must improve | % No mark required | % Total |
| Not set | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 |
| Ethnic minority | 16 | 74.7 | 8.6 | 0.7 | 100 |
| White | 20.5 | 73.3 | 6 | 0.3 | 100 |
| Total Declared | 20 | 73.4 | 6.3 | 0.3 | 100 |
| Not set | |||||
| Source: Resource Management | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Notes: 1. Data as at 31 March 2013. 2. * - Level of data too low for publication and percentages are rounded to 1 decimal place, given this totals may not sum due to rounding. 3. Percentages shown are the number of employees awarded a performance marking by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees awarded a performance marking who have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. 4. Percentages shown are the number of employees awarded a performance marking by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees that have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. 5. This data does not include the SCS or employees who have not been awarded a marking. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Table 19.7: Percentage of performance mark awarded by gender in relation to overall number of performance markings given 1, 2, 3, 5 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Gender | % Exceeded | % Achieved | % Must improve | % No mark required | % Total |
| Not set | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 |
| Female | 71.8 | 69.1 | 55.8 | 80.9 | 68.8 |
| Male | 28.2 | 30.9 | 44.2 | 19.1 | 31.2 |
| Total Declared | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| Not set | |||||
| Source: Resource Management | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Notes: 1. Data as at 31 March 2013. 2. * - Level of data too low for publication and percentages are rounded to 1 decimal place, given this totals may not sum due to rounding. 3. Percentages shown are the number of employees awarded a performance marking by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees awarded a performance marking who have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. 4. Percentages shown are the number of employees awarded a performance marking by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees that have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. 5. This data does not include the SCS or employees who have not been awarded a marking. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Table 19.7: Percentage of performance mark awarded by gender in relation to overall number of performance markings given 1, 2, 3, 5 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Gender | % Exceeded | % Achieved | % Must improve | % No mark required | % Total |
| Not set | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 |
| Female | 71.8 | 69.1 | 55.8 | 80.9 | 68.8 |
| Male | 28.2 | 30.9 | 44.2 | 19.1 | 31.2 |
| Total Declared | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| Not set | |||||
| Source: Resource Management | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Notes: 1. Data as at 31 March 2013. 2. * - Level of data too low for publication and percentages are rounded to 1 decimal place, given this totals may not sum due to rounding. 3. Percentages shown are the number of employees awarded a performance marking by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees awarded a performance marking who have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. 4. Percentages shown are the number of employees awarded a performance marking by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees that have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. 5. This data does not include the SCS or employees who have not been awarded a marking. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Not set | |||||
| Table 19.8: Percentage of performance mark awarded by gender in relation to total number of employees in that group 1, 2, 4, 5 | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Gender | % Exceeded | % Achieved | % Must improve | % No mark required | % Total |
| Not set | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 | 2013 |
| Female | 20.5 | 73.7 | 5.3 | 0.5 | 100 |
| Male | 17.7 | 72.7 | 9.2 | 0.3 | 100 |
| Total Declared | 19.6 | 73.4 | 6.5 | 0.5 | 100 |
| Not set | |||||
| Source: Resource Management | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| Not set | |||||
| Notes: 1. Data as at 31 March 2013. 2. * - Level of data too low for publication and percentages are rounded to 1 decimal place, given this totals may not sum due to rounding. 3. Percentages shown are the number of employees awarded a performance marking by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees awarded a performance marking who have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. 4. Percentages shown are the number of employees awarded a performance marking by protected characteristic, over the total number of employees that have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic. 5. This data does not include the SCS or employees who have not been awarded a marking. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |