Equality Bodies

Annual Nordic Equality Bodies/Ombudsman Institution Meeting in Denmark

/ [The Danish Institute for Human Rights hosted the meeting entitled ‘Nordic provisions of positive duties in the labour market’ on September 6 and 7, 2012. /]

External publications

OSI and World Bank reports on improving the economic situation of marginalized Roma

[/Last month the Open Society Institute and the World Bank published reports entitled “Empowerment through Employment: Capitalizing on the Economic Opportunities of Roma Inclusion” and “Reducing Vulnerability and Promoting the Self-Employment of Roma in Eastern Europe Through Financial Inclusion” respectively. /]

Communications GPG

“Does it matter to you if we’re not equal” campaign (Belgium)


Organised by the Institute for the Equality of Women and Men

1) Brief description of the campaign

In accordance with its mission, the institute launched a campaign in 2010 to raise public awareness with respect to people’s daily behaviour that can reinforce gender inequality and gender-based discrimination.

[*Main messages*] (the campaign used 4 images relating to 4 themes):

  • Intimate partner violence;
  • Sexist stereotypes;
  • The gender pay gap;
  • Discrimination against pregnant women.

[*Slogan:*] Is it the same to you if we’re not equal?


  • 4 public notices in French, Dutch and German;
  • A flyer in French and Dutch;
  • A video in French and Dutch;
  • A new website was created, offering a quiz on the main themes of the campaign. After filling out the questionnaire, surfers were redirected to the Institute’s webpage;
  • A profile on Facebook.
    The campaign started in June 2010, together with the distribution of the institute study Pregnant at work: experiences of working women (press statement will be attached shortly).

2) General objectives of the campaign

The general objective of the campaign was to draw attention and to make people aware of behaviour or gestures that may seem innocent but can lead to gender-based discrimination.

3) Specific objectives of the campaign

More specifically, the objective was to remind the population that the institute is the government body to turn to in cases of gender-based discrimination by contacting its legal unit through its toll-free number 0800 12 800.

4) Target audiences (primary and secondary)

[*Primary target group:*] the public opinion.

[*Secondary target group*]: employers, trade unions, pregnant women, victims and perpetrators of intimate partner violence, advertisers.

5) Stakeholders involved and the difficulties encountered and surpassed while managining the relationship with them

The main stakeholders included organizations promoting gender equality, institutional partners (e.g. the Centre for Equal Opportunities and Opposition to Racism, the Regions, hospitals, public services, police departments, etc.), associations, social partners, sport centres, theatres, public welfare centres, libraries, schools, university campuses, cultural centres, school guidance organizations, family planning centres, and so on.

6) Resources and budget

The institute made use of a communication agency for the conception of the visuals and the supervision of the media plan. A team of 4 employees of the institute worked together to conceive the messages and manage the project.
The costs of the campaign amounted to around 80.000 Euros.

7) Detailed description of the communication channels used and messages conveyed. How did the organisers connect with their audiences? Possible pitfalls to be avoided.

60.000 posters were distributed through the institute’s partner networks, 2000 of which in the country’s 176 police zones, 600 in the trams, busses and metros of Belgium’s five major cities (Brussels, Liège, Charleroi, Antwerp and Ghent), and 600 more in all Belgian train stations.

The institute also distributed information flyers explaining its different fields of action. The post offices also cooperated in this distribution.

8) Explanation of the mechanism put in place to evaluate and monitor the campaign

Using Google Analytics, the institute analysed the traffic on the campaign website for each of the three languages (see attached reports for French, Dutch and German).

The institute also noticed a rise in information requests and complaints relating to pregnancy in the field of employment. The institute had focused its efforts on this theme within the context of its publication Pregnant at work: experiences of working women, and the launch of the campaign.

9) Lessons learned and pitfalls to be avoided

For a campaign of this magnitude the institute considered that it would have been useful to conduct a media analysis and to analyse traffic on its website.

As for the effect of the campaign, the institute noticed that it managed to draw the attention of the Frenchspeaking population in particular. Maybe a more in-depth analysis of the main themes of the campaign in the Flemish and German-speaking communities could have made it possible to have a better idea of the expectations and spheres of interest, allowing the use of different, language group specific approaches.

Furthermore, it would have been relevant to see to it that the communication agency developed the campaign starting from three languages separately, instead of translating the French version. The slogan was a lot less powerful in Dutch and German than it was in French. /]

Communications GPG

Integrated anti-discrimination campaign (Cyprus)


Organised by the Office of the Commissioner for Administration (Ombudsman)

1) Brief description of the campaign

Anti-discrimination campaign held between 1/12/2009 and 30/11/2010 that included several actions and targeted a wide range of audiences.

2) General objectives of the campaign

The general goals and objectives were, firstly and most significantly, to raise awareness and sensitize the general public on issues of discrimination; secondly, to inform selected stakeholders on issues of discrimination; thirdly, to identify – for policy making purposes – the needs of certain vulnerable groups; and, lastly, to promote some good practices in combating discrimination.

3) Target audiences

[*The general public*] (which was reached by a media campaign, a theatre play, information leaflets and the website of the Equality Body);

[*Journalists*] (who were targeted by the Guiding Principles on how the Media can Contribute and Assist in Combating Racism, Xenophobia and Discrimination);

[*Employers*] (who were reached by the Code of Good Practices on Combating Discrimination Against People with Disabilities in the Field of Employment and Occupation);

[*Trade Unions*] (that were reached through a seminar for training union members on antidiscrimination legislation, a Code of Good Practices for People with Disabilities in Employment, and a series of surveys – the results of which can be useful to trade unions);

[*Relevant Public Authorities,*] mainly the Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of Interior (that were targeted by two surveys – the results of which can be useful for policy making purposes, a training seminar on gender mainstreaming in migration policies and practices, and a conference on minority rights).

4) Stakeholders involved and the difficulties encountered and surpassed while managining the relationship with them

The initiative had implications for a number of relevant stakeholders, as follows:

[*Policy Makers*]

The results of two surveys and of a training seminar on gender mainstreaming in migration policies and practices, as well as a conference on minority rights were useful for policies regarding migration and minorities.

[*Mass media – journalists*]

The media campaign involved the mass media of Cyprus in the initiative and ensured their contribution and assistance in the conveyance of the antidiscrimination messages to the general public. Furthermore, the Guiding Principles on How the Media can Contribute and Assist in Combating Racism, Xenophobia and Discrimination as helpful to individual journalists in their day to day work, as well as to owners and/or managers of media organisations.


  • Two of the actions were done in collaboration with two NGOs dealing with gender issues
  • In drafting the Code of Good Practices for People with Disabilities in Employment and Occupation, the views of the Cyprus Confederation of Organizations of the Disabled were taken into account. The Confederation consists of a number of NGOs dealing with disability issues. Several copies of the Code were sent to the Confederation to distribute to its members;
  • Representatives of selected NGOs were invited to participate in some of the events organised, such as a seminar on gender mainstreaming in migration policies, and the presentation of a survey’s results.

[*Trade Unions/Employers associations*]

  • The Code of Good Practices on Combating Discrimination Against People with Disabilities in the Field of Employment and Occupation was a helpful guide to both trade unionists and employers. Helpful information on
    antidiscrimination legislation was also provided to trade unionists in a seminar organized by the Ombudsman.

The [*main difficulties*] came in implementing the media campaign, mainly in relation to the media ads which had a message against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation:

  • On June 9th a press conference was organized for the launching of the campaign during which the media ads were presented. Some journalists expressed concern as to whether the sexual orientation ads were too “progressive” for the conservative Cypriot society and would cause negative reactions. One journalist even reacted herself negatively to the ads arguing that they were “encouraging” homosexuality;
  • During the campaign, our Office received some complaints – in total about 30 – regarding the sexual orientation ads – both in terms of their content as well as the “inappropriate” – according to the complainants – time of the day they were broadcasted.
  • One of the radio stations that were originally selected for the radio campaign was the Cyprus Broadcasting Corporation (Cybc –, which is the public broadcaster of the Republic of Cyprus. However, when the radio spots were sent to the Cybc and they were listened to, the general director of the corporation decided not to broadcast the radio spot on sexual orientation. Over a telephone conversation, he informed the Ombudsman that he could not allow the radio spot on sexual orientation to be played, because, as he said, Cybc is a public organisation. Immediately our Office decided to withdraw all ads from Cybc. Later on, and within the framework of an interview, the general director, referring to homosexuality, stated that the Cybc may accept that such “phenomena” exist and may tolerate them, but it has no obligation to put them on air.

Campaign_poster_Cyprus_.png The decision of the general director of Cybc and his above-mentioned comment sparked a public dialogue in the media and many columnists wrote articles in newspapers and magazines in relation to this matter (attachments soon to follow). The vast majority of these articles were critical of the controversial decision and in favor of the campaign. Furthermore, a group on Facebook was created, named “say no to all kinds of discrimination”, in which all the ads of the campaign were uploaded and people discussed the campaign as well as the decision of the Cybc.

In view of these reactions, on June 22nd the Governing Council of Cybc revoked/annulled the controversial decision of the general director and decided to allow the transmission/broadcasting of the radio spot against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. In light of this development the Ombudsman re-modified its schedule and for the rest of the campaign it transmitted/broadcasted the radio spots also on Cybc.

Some difficulties were also faced in persuading the major relevant stakeholders to support the effort with respect to the campaign booklets. Such stakeholders were the Union of Cyprus Journalists and the Cyprus
Media Complaints Commission, which is an independent press council, responsible for the self-regulation of the news media on the basis of a written “Journalists’ Code of Practice”. Their reservations were based mainly on their concerns for overlap of competences between them and our Office (as an Equality Body), as well as concerns for issues relating to the right of freedom of speech. After many efforts, though – which included exchange of letters, a meeting on June 16th 2011 and some modifications in the text of the booklet – the written support of the major implicated parties for the Guiding Principles was secured.

5) Resources and budget

Main sources of funding: the European Commission (79%) and the Republic of Cyprus (21%). These funds amounted to 196.761 Euros overall.

6) Detailed description of the communication channels used and messages conveyed. How did the organisers connect with their audiences? Possible pitfalls to be avoided.

The Ombudsman:

  • organized a nationwide media campaign on issues of discrimination which included TV, Radio and Newspaper ads;
  • published a Code of Good Practices on Combating Discrimination Against People with Disabilities in the Field of Employment and Occupation;
  • published a booklet which codifies a set of Guiding Principles on how the Media can Contribute and Assist in Combating Racism, Xenophobia and Discrimination;
  • published two information leaflets – one for each department in the Office dealing with discrimination issues – in a user-friendly design and a size easy to distribute;
  • constructed a website specifically for the antidiscrimination spectrum of the Office’s competences and activities;
  • organized, in cooperation with the Cypriot Labour Institute, a training seminar to train union members on anti-discrimination legislation;
  • organized, in cooperation with the parliamentary representatives of the three recognized religious/ethnic minorities of Cyprus, a one day event that included a conference in the morning and a cultural event in the afternoon on the rights, protection and contribution of these minorities to Cypriot society;
  • provided financial support to: (1) a theatre group to produce a theatre play which addressed xenophobic attitudes towards immigrants and promoted respect for ethnic diversity; (2) an NGO working on gender issues to organize a training seminar on gender mainstreaming in migration policies and practices; (3) another NGO working on gender issues, to conduct a survey aiming to sketch the profile of the economic female immigrants in Cyprus and to identify their needs for personal and professional development; (4) the Labour Institute to upgrade its antidiscrimination website, and to conduct a qualitative survey aimed at identifying the forms of discrimination suffered by migrant workers in the hotel and food industries in

7) Explanation of the mechanism put in place to evaluate and monitor the campaign

An officer from the Office was delegated with the responsibility of monitoring the campaign, the contacts with the European Commission, the management of the budget and the submission of the evaluation form. He was assisted by other officers and the Ombudsman herself.

8) Lessons learned and pitfalls to be avoided

The most important outcome of the initiative was the media campaign because, firstly, it managed to send its antidiscrimination message to a significant part of society and, secondly, because it was the action that was
most widely discussed – touching upon, explicitly and for the first time through mass media, the issue of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The fact that the negative reactions were not only less than previously feared, but that they provoked strong counter-reactions which benefited the campaign, was in a sense a “lesson learned” that the Cyprus society was/is, at the end of the day, readier than anticipated to accept the antidiscrimination message on this matter, which by many is still considered a taboo.

Another important outcome was that, for the implementation of the initiative, the Ombudsman was able to cooperate/work together with seven other national stakeholders. This cooperation has not only assisted the Ombudsman in better achieving the aims of the initiative, but it has also allowed it to build partnerships for combating discrimination in the future.

9) Additional information

The initiative could be considered sucessful considering that:

  • The media campain reached a significant part of the population and it received mostly favorable comments by the public and the media;
  • A very lagre number of people attended/participated in the events organised;
  • For the events for which evaluation surveys were distributed, the overwhelming majority of the responses were positive or very positive;
  • The Ombudsman was able to cooperate with a number of other national stakeholders and build closer relationships that could lead to effective partnerships for combating discrimination in the future.
Communications GPG

“Stop Hate Crimes” campaign (Denmark)


Organised by the Danish Institute for Human Rights

1) Brief description of the campaign

In Denmark it seems that more hate crimes are committed than reported to the police. Most hate crimes are committed in Copenhagen at night by young people. Therefore, the Danish Institute for Human Rights, the Copenhagen Police Department, the City of Copenhagen, and the City of Frederiksberg ran a campaign to stop hate crimes. The campaign was called “Stop Hate Crimes”.

2) General objectives of the campaign

  • To get victims and witnesses of hate crimes to report them to the police;
  • To prevent and combat hate crimes;
  • To increase the general public’s understanding of hate crimes;
  • To let people know where victims of hate crimes can get help.

3) Specific objectives of the campaign

The long-termed and more specific objectives of the campaign were to make people aware of the fact that hate crimes are committed in Danish society and that it is a serious problem, as well as to increase the number of hate crimes being reported to the police, but to decrease the number of hate crimes being committed.

4) Target audiences (primary and secondary)

Hate crimes make up a complex problem which is not solved on a short-term basis. Therefore, the campaign is only one of the efforts in the battle against hate crimes. During the next five years different initiatives will be
launched in order to reach different target groups, which are all crucial to the solution of the problem. However, the primary target group of the campaign ‘Stop hate crimes’ was the offenders and the victims, aged 15 to 30. Within this group, the campaign mainly focused on minorities who according to the Danish Criminal Code are the victims of hate crimes (i.e. persons of another race, belief, or sexual orientation than the majority).

5) Stakeholders involved and the difficulties encountered and surpassed while managining therelationship with them

As such there were no difficulties encountered and cooperation between the partners went very well. This good cooperation can be attributed to the fact that from the beginning expectations and eventual issues were
discussed and cleared. The only problem that could be mentioned was tackling of the media – as the partners have different strategies and different ways of “wording” issues – but even this was solved by allowing each partner to “speak” on behalf of itself.

6) Resources and budget

The total cost of the campaign was 146.500 Euro. This covers the cost of the creative development of the campaign, production, and media. However, it does not include the time spent on the campaign by the employees of the Danish Institute for Human Rights, the Copenhagen Police Department, the City of Copenhagen, and the City of Frederiksberg.

7) Detailed description of the communication channels used and messages conveyed. How did the organisers connect with their audiences? Possible pitfalls to be avoided.

The campaign focused on making an impression on people in places were hate crimes are committed. Thus, the campaign featured big banners at the front of buildings facing the town hall square of Copenhagen, as well as large posters at 100 stands around the city of Copenhagen and Frederiksberg and at the rear end of buses (photos soon to follow).

The campaign also featured posters at gyms (Fitness World) in Copenhagen and Frederiksberg where people age 15-30 work out on a daily basis.
The campaign also made use of social media. It had a Facebook Cause page, a Facebook campaign, and a homepage

A pamphlet about hate crimes and why it is important to stop them was produced for the campaign. The campaign also involved local businesses by mail with letters requesting them to put up stickers in their display windows urging people to stop these crimes. Local as well as national media also mentioned the campaign, and at a festival in Copenhagen celebrating diversity a tent was put up showing the posters of the campaign inviting people to come discuss the campaign with the campaign managers.

A special feature was made by an art duo at the main shopping street in Copenhagen. The art duo placed a glass case displaying a megaphone at a shopping street. Every day at noon for a week a man stopped by the
glass case, took out the megaphone and yelled: “It is never too late to say I’m sorry”. This was a loud comment on the way we treat foreigners and each other.

8) Explanation of the mechanism put in place to evaluate and monitor the campaign

One of the main objectives of the campaign was to decrease the number of hate crimes being committed. However, since the campaign ran in 2010, it is not yet possible to measure if this objective has been met.

Nevertheless, the campaign was noticed by the press, which widely mentioned it and helped put focus on hate crimes. The Facebook cause gained almost 2.000 supporters, and the Facebook campaign generated 5.000

The campaign has also resulted in the police now investigating whether there is a motive of hate behind violent crimes. 25 police investigators in the Copenhagen police force have been trained in handling hate crimes, and a joint European database for registration of hate crimes has been launched.

9) Additional information

To access a slideshow of the posters used in the campaign, please click here ./]

Communications GPG

Communications activities under the “Iris Project” (Greece)


Organised by the Greek Ombudsman (GO)

1) Overall context

The Greek Ombudsman’s team of experts handling communication on anti-discrimination issues, while following the institution’s plan for Dec 2010 – Nov. 2011, with activities that have already been drafted in previous years, could not help but notice that, because of the changing socio-economic context, their messages where becoming increasingly irrelevant to their recipients belonging to the general public. Unprecedented economic decline, affecting especially the middle class Greeks, has resulted in resentment to any kind of privileges bestowed to particular people or groups, including the discourse on measures of positive discrimination.

In particular, a version of GO’s anti-discrimination leaflet which was published as a cover of a popular Athenian youth free press edition, attracted some negative public comments such as (a) “this doesn’t do any good to the average suffering Greek” since it advertises services affecting mainly minorities and immigrants (a blogger even dubbed the GO as “the ombudsman of the non-Greek“, and (b) “it was an activity which must have been costly and is unneeded, done by a public institution in a time of austerity” (note: the publication indicated that it was co-funded by the EU).

After evaluating such comments the leadership of the GO, following consultation with the anti-discrimination team, sought to shift the outlook of the institution’s anti-discrimination activities. As regards the printed and
electronic communication material, the emphasis would shift, giving more weight to discrimination issues related to the general population, e.g. starting a text by referring first to pregnant women cases or people with disabilities instead of Roma, immigrants, non Christians etc. Also, as regards consultation with local communities and authorities, the diminishing resources of state assistance (money and people) for social inclusion policies are becoming a prominent topic and the funding factor plays now a more important role in the Ombudsman’s outlook than it did in the past. In that context the Ombudsman is obliged to bind its proposals to the administration for social inclusion activities with logistic and funding solutions, bearing also in mind that such activities should be creating a visible output for the general population as well.

2) Brief description of the campaign

The Iris Project is funded by the EU PROGRESS Programme, managed by the General Directorate for Youth within the Labour Ministry, and benefits from the expertise of the Ombudsman, the Directorate itself and several NGOs specialised on youth. All parties are involved in the implementation of anti-discrimination activities.

In 2010 the Greek Ombudsman was responsible for the production of information materials about the body through youth press, the organisation of public information days on anti-discrimination legislation, the development of communication activities promoting the integration of Roma people and raising awareness of their rights.

3) General objectives of the campaign

Awareness raising and information against discrimination focusing on the mandate of the Greek Ombudsman (GO).

4) Details about the campaign’s activities

[*Activity 1 – Publication of leaflets on the GO mandate and circulation through youth press:*]

Roma_issues_handling_booklet_for_the_public_administration_officers.jpg Creation and publication of leaflets that described the GO competence on discrimination issues, the ways that the institution can mediate in cases falling within its mandate and the procedure of submitting a complaint. A
complaint form was attached, while there was also a provision for containing information on the Braille system.

The leaflet would be available in the Ombudsman offices and on every contact opportunity with the wider public (information field missions, conferences, festivals, etc.). It was also proposed that the dissemination of this material be made through the youth free press in Athens and if possible in other major Greek cities, as well as through publications referring to the groups that are covered by the antidiscrimination legislation.

The target is the provision of information to the wider public on the mandate of the ombudsman as a Specialised Equality Body for the promotion and implementation of the principle of equal treatment in the public sector. Also, to inform targeted audiences on the types of discrimination that are covered by the legislation and the means of remedy with an aim to increase the number of incoming complaints.

[*Activity 2 – Public information days on anti-discrimination legislation:*]

Four missions of GO staff in Greek provincial capitals: this activity draws from the long experience and common practice of the GO institution in implementing public information events with the participation of the local
administration, NGOs and local media.

There is also parallel functioning of a citizen’s reception desk where citizens can receive personalized information and can submit their complaints.

This is an effort to decentralize the services offered by the GO, but primarily it aims to inform the local societies on the mandate of the GO and come in closer contact with potential victims of discrimination.

[*Activity 3 – Roma integration informational guidebook for local authorities:*]

This refers to the creation and publication of a Guidebook on Issues of Marginalized Roma Populations specifically designed in order to answer questions posed by members of municipal councils and public servants. The aim of this publication is to gather and systematize the obligations of competent authorities on a local level, in order to facilitate the social inclusion of the Roma.

[*Activity 4 – Integrated interventions on Roma “hot–spots” settlements:*]

On the spot investigations in problematic settlements of Roma populations around Greece: meetings are held with Roma and local authorities on the current issues creating social frictions. Also, data is being collected and registered on Roma numbers, their housing situation, school attendance and other factors related to their social inclusion, such as local initiatives and possible projects that are being implemented. The collected data on the GO’s Roma issues will be published on a dedicated webpage. The aim of the GO is, on the one hand, to contribute to the solution of critical cases of social exclusion and address them in relation to the implementation of the national action plan for the Roma, while also collecting field data and disseminating them through the GO reports and internet resources.

[*Activity 5 – Creation of Greek Ombudsman internet resources for Roma integration:*]

Creation of GO special webpages on Roma issues, dubbed as “Ombudsman for the Roma” and their translation in English. These pages will contain an interactive mapping of the problematic areas, as they are deducted from the 12 years of GO’s case load. This will also be a place of promoting good practice in the field.


Communications GPG

Producing a brochure in Braille (Greece)


Organised by the Greek Ombudsman (GO)

1) Brief description of the initiative
Following certain requests from blind activists the GO has envisaged, for some years now, to make its internet material accessible to the blind and visually impaired people. With the help of its IT specialized staff this became to a significant extent a reality. Nevertheless, an initiative to translate any of its printed material to Braille language has never been undertaken or even explored up to now. The anti-discrimination team, starting from scratch, decided to seek advice from blind support groups as to the best suitable methods of printed communication with this group. Following a few e-mails and a productive meeting with the representative of a well established educational institute for the blind, the GO received enough information to make decisions and go ahead with the publication. It was most useful that, in parallel with the above, the GO received suggestions for a similar pattern of approach to this issue from the Northern Ireland Equality Commission, following our query on the Equinet forum.

On the leaflet design the GO’s options were limited since a Braille digit is of a standard size, that equals the length of a fingertip. Therefore, when translated the text of the short 3-fold leaflet became a 14 page A4 size
booklet. The printing is done by special printers that convert the normal documents (.doc, .txt, etc.) to Braille digits. In the GO’s case, before going ahead with the production, the services of a blind proofreader were employed. The GO opted also for the publication to have a normal printed cover in order for the text to be recognizable by any administrator.

The GO concluded that the production should be made by a specialized production unit using primarily blind personnel, in order to maximize the social output.

In order to pinpoint the exact users of Braille language who will benefit more, the GO utilized the senders lists of the blind support groups. A major part of the distribution was done directly by the support groups themselves and the publication was also advertised in their respective internet and periodical publications. Amongst the recipients were specialized and normal schools that have at least one blind student, public libraries and disability related social/medical services.


Communication Strategies and Practices

Ireland: Say No To Ageism Week


Organised by the Equality Authority

1) Brief description of the campaign

The Say No to Ageism Week (SNTA) is an initiative developed by the Equality Authority and the Health Service Executive (H.S.E.) with the support of the Office for Older People, the public transport sector and older people’sorganisations. It has been run annually since 2004.

The aim of the week is to promote new awareness and understanding of ageism and of how ageism excludes older people from participating in and contributing to society.

The Say No to Ageism Week comprises two complementary strands: a public information campaign and a series of sectorally based actions that are designed to enhance age friendly service provision.

Currently, the working framework for Say No to Ageism Week comprises a balance between awareness raising and actions, namely:

  • a launch event;
  • a conference with a Say No to Ageism theme;
  • an advertising and media campaign;
  • action plans developed by different sectors in association with the Equality Authority to support the initiative in the year ahead.

2011 was the eighth year of the initiative, co-funded in 2011 by the European Union under the PROGRESS Programme 2007-2013.

2) General objectives of the campaign

The Employment Equality Act (1998 – 2011) and the Equal Status Act (2000 – 2011) outlaw discrimination in employment, vocational training, advertising, collective agreements, the provision of goods and services and other opportunities to which the public generally have access on nine distinct grounds. These grounds are gender, civil status, family status, age, disability, race, sexual orientation, religious belief and membership of the Traveller Community.

The Equality Authority wished to focus a public campaign on ageism because it is possibly the only equality ground where there is a widespread lack of understanding or recognition of what ageism is and its consequences at societal, organisational and individual level. Research and statistics gathered through our Public Information Centre showed that there was a high level of queries recorded under the ‘Age’ ground. In 2010, 19.3% of case-files under the Employment Equality Acts 1998 – 2011 and 12.6% of case-files under the Equal Status Acts 2000 – 2011 were related to perceived age discrimination.

The Say No to Ageism Week has two main purposes:

  • To highlight how ageism operates in society, in the workplace and in the provision of services;
  • To promote and support the development of “age friendly” service provision.

The rationale for an ongoing campaign against ageism is strong. There is a wealth of evidence that negative stereotyping of and discrimination against older people is pervasive and injurious. The statistics gathered through the Equality Authority and Equality Tribunal systems have supported this belief.

3) Specific objectives of the campaign

The Say No To Ageism Week has been held in May on an annual basis since 2004. The aim of the week is to promote new awareness and understanding of ageism and of how ageism excludes older people from participating in and contributing to society.

2009.png In order to progress the above goals, the Say No To Ageism campaign promotes its message through a combination of outdoor advertising, internet, and poster campaigns. It activates its anti-ageism/age friendly message through sectorally based measures that are designed to shape and encourage age friendly service provision. An event launch is held to open the Say No To Ageism Week which is attended by stakeholders such as NGOs, policy makers, community groups, academics, members of the general public and the media, and which generates considerable media coverage.

Each year, a sectoral based issue is highlighted. Since 2004, a conference dealing with a specific issue, chosen with input from stakeholders, is held. These conferences have addressed issues such as defining ageism, developing an age equality agenda for Ireland, awareness workshops for health service personnel entitled ‘Good Practice in Age Friendly Provision of Services’, developing good practice guides with the transport sector in dealing with transport issues for older people. In 2008, a conference entitled ‘Active for Life: Towards Age Friendly Sports and Leisure Facilities in Ireland’ was organised. It examined the barriers experienced by older people in adopting and maintaining physically active lifestyles.

In 2010/2011 information queries and cases handled by the Equality Authority pointed to a particular problem with the insurance industry in Ireland in terms of ageist practices. There is considerable demand among older people’s organizations for actions to tackle this problem. Consequently, the Equality Authority chose to emphasize this in their 2011 SNTA seminar ‘Accessing Insurance for Older People in Ireland and the European Union’. It also planned to work on a sectoral project with the insurance industry to highlight their obligations under the non-discrimination legislation and to seek to get them to improve their practices and to move to an age-friendly model.

4) Target audiences

[*The general public*] (raising public awareness): this is done through the use of advertising (posters, billboards, etc.) and facilitated through the media;

[*Older people:*] this is facilitated through the public awareness campaign, working alongside older people’s groups, the Authority’s contact database, and the H.S.E.

[*Stakeholders/Policy makers, older people’s groups, NGOs, etc*] this is done through the dissemination of information to mailing lists, through relationships with other involved groups and through the campaign’s launch event and seminar;

[*Sectoral Approach:*] each year a specific sectoral area, with an issue affecting older people, is targeted (e.g. the hospitality sector).

5) Stakeholders involved and the difficulties encountered and surpassed while managining the relationship with them

To ensure that the SNTA campaign achieves its full potential, a wide range of partner organisations and stakeholders are involved in all stages of the campaign, particularly in the planning stages.

[*Government bodies*] involved include the Health Service Executive (H.S.E.), The Office for Older People based in the Department of Health & Children and Pobal (an intermediary agency that works on behalf of Government to support communities and local agencies toward achieving social inclusion, reconciliation and equality).

[*The transport sector*] is represented on the SNTA committee by Dublin Bus, Veolia (Luas) and Irish Rail.

[*Active organisations*] working within the age sector included Age & Opportunity, Age Action, AGE Platform and OWN (Older Women’s Network).

[*The Equality Authority’s*] role was to bring about a change in attitude and practice not only in society but in key service areas. By bringing the service providers into partnership a certain amount of compromise is always necessary to be balanced with the gains achieved by their direct participation. Therefore, the campaigns did not need to ‘name and shame’ a sector, or its management, but rather posed challenges that could be globally embraced in its advertising messages. Service delivery did improve with the undertaking of action projects within the service provider which proved useful and valuable.

6) Resources and budget

The Say No To Ageism Campaign of the Equality Authority is supported through funding from the European Union Programme for Employment and Social Solidarity – PROGRESS. In 2011 this amounted to 37.502 Euros(excl. VAT). This was to fund design costs, materials and media promotion of the campaign.

The Health Service Executive (H.S.E.) as a partner organisation contributed 15.000 Euros. Dissemination of materials was co-organised and facilitated through H.S.E. networks.

Stakeholders from the transport sector (Dublin Bus, Veolia and Irish Rail) provide advertising space on their transport network at no financial cost.

7) Detailed description of the communication channels used and messages conveyed. How did the organisers connect with their audiences? Possible pitfalls to be avoided.

2011.png The Say No To Ageism campaign is aimed at a variety of target groups, through two main strands: a public information strand and a sectoral based project. A public awareness campaign is run throughout the week, focusing on the central message of ‘I Say No To Ageism’. The focus on awareness is in recognition that ageism will only be eliminated where there is a broad awareness of the stereotyping of older people.

The public campaign strand is achieved through a variety of means:

  • Outdoor advertising conveying the ‘I Say No To Ageism’ message is placed nationwide at strategic locations such as major billboards and advertising locations. Stakeholders from public transport agencies such as Dublin Bus and Veolia provide advertising space on their transport networks.
  • Extensive media interviews are conducted generating debate on radio and print networks. This aims to bring the issue of ageism to a mainstream audience.
  • Increasingly online media is used through social media channels such as Twitter and Facebook.
  • An initiative which was commended in the 2004 review involves the targeted sending of posters to locations which are specifically used by the target group of older people or in areas where the issue of ageism may be of particular importance. In addition to being areas frequented by target groups, they are also locations in which further information on the message of the posters can be received. These locations include local health centres, community groups, active retirement groups and Universities.

The second strand of the project involves selecting and working with a particular sector to provide training and develop initiatives within that sector which combat ageism or ageist practices.

For example, the transport sector, comprising of Irish Rail, Dublin Bus, Veolia (LUAS), Bus Éireann and the Rural Transport Initiative, joined the initiative in 2006 and produced an action plan to promote more age friendly transport.

Highlights of the action programme include:

[*Dialogue with older people*] – organising meetings with organisations of older people to explore age friendly practices;

[*Training*] – providing age awareness training to customer service staff and front line staff involved in the provision of services;

[*Communication*] – reviewing and developing information materials to ensure they are user friendly and accessible to older people;

[*Customer service*] – developing and communicating a policy that includes a focus on age friendly customer services in consultation with older people and their organisations.

These sectoral approaches have been highlighted as having a real impact directly upon the lives of older people, in a practical way.

8) Explanation of the mechanisms put in place to evaluate and monitor the campaign

The Say No To Ageism campaign has been in existence since 2004. With such a long running campaign, the importance of review is paramount to ensure that the core ideals behind the drive are not misplaced, to ensure the campaign is reaching its target audiences, and to assess ways of keeping the campaign fresh.

There are many methods in place for evaluating and monitoring the campaign:


In 2008, after the fourth year of the campaign, a review of the Say No To Ageism initiative was commissioned and conducted. This report was conducted by a research and evaluation psychologist and the Terms of
Reference given were as follows:

  • Explore the continuing relevance of Say No to Ageism Week;
  • Ascertain the views of the organising agencies involved in Say No to Ageism Week and relevant stakeholders on previous campaigns and the future direction of the initiatives;
  • Examine the impact and potential future impact of the current approach to Say No to Ageism Week;
  • Identify the most effective use of the resources available to further the shared aims of the organising agencies;
  • Assess the impact of the work done in past Say No to Ageism Weeks;
  • Identify, and provide a rationale, for options to build on and further develop the initiative.

The review was separated into seven sections – Introduction; Methodology; Legislation, Definition and Evidence of Ageism; Description of Say No to Ageism Week; Income & Expenditure; Stakeholder Feedback on Say No to Ageism Week Activities; Impact, Effectiveness and Future Relevance; Conclusions and Options for Consideration.

The research incorporated desk research and stakeholder consultations. The desk research strand comprised a review of policy and publicity material, examination of the minutes and accounts of Say No to Ageism Week partnership and a focused literature review.

Stakeholder consultations were held with: the Equality Authority; Health Service Executive (two sources); National Council on Age and Older People (three sources); Age and Opportunity; Dublin Bus; Bus Éireann; Irish Rail; Irish Hospitality Institute and ILAM, the Industry Body for Sports, Fitness, Aquatic Facilities, Spas & Wellness.

A structured interview guide was designed and designed and piloted with the HSE and National Council on Aging and Older People (see Appendix 1 below). It reflects the Terms of Reference for the review and

  • targeting and content – who activities are aimed at and what has being done;
  • strategy and tactics – the means by which anti ageism policy is effected and how;
  • budget and resources – what’s being spent and to what effect;
  • effectiveness and impact – the extent to which the campaign is meeting its objectives and the results achieved.

Two focus groups (one urban, one rural) with active retirement groups were arranged with the help of Age and Opportunity. The themes addressed by the Focus Groups included:

  • awareness of Say No to Ageism Week;
  • need for a Say No to Ageism Week (SNTA);
  • areas older people experiences of ageism or discrimination;
  • the appropriateness of the SNTA focus on transport, health, leisure and hospitality;
  • the effectiveness of public information campaigns to overcome ageism; importance of the campaign for the future.

The focus groups were well attended (10-12 for each session) and there was active participation by all attendees in the discussions that emerged.

The information gathered from the stakeholder interviews, focus groups and questionnaires was analysed thematically and consistent findings were recorded. These themes and the issues arising, together with findings from the desk research, fed into an assessment of the extent to which the Say No to Ageism Week is achieving its objectives and the impact and relevance of the scheme. The analysis was strongly reliant on the stakeholder interviews and is (with the exception of the examination of spend) entirely qualitative, based on emergent themes.

From the anecdotal evidence available, (website blogs, feedback to the Equality Authority and to the reviewer from older people) there seems to be reasonably good awareness of the week, particularly in Dublin, and it has prompted debate. Furthermore, the older people consulted think the public awareness campaign is important and that it makes people think about older people’s contribution to society and their needs.

In terms of the poster element of the public awareness campaign, feedback from stakeholders indicates that it was more effective in sectoral settings than public places, where the linkage of local initiatives with a larger national campaign was said to endorse its importance.

The review found that :

  • the Say No to Ageism Week is meeting a real need to raise awareness and increase understanding of ageism, particularly in the nominated sectors. It has developed a range of sectorally based responses to encourage age friendly service provision and to challenge the negative stereotyping of older people. The strong commitment, engagement and working relationship between the partners and with the sectoral stakeholders has led to the development of a campaign that has far greater impact than the sum of its parts. Overall, it has been successfully and thoughtfully implemented and has had positive impacts on service providers understanding of and capacity to meet the needs of their older clients and customers. All of the partners and sectoral participants in the Say No to Ageism Week are fully committed to the campaign and its continuance;
  • The key drivers of its success to date and its future are: (1) commitment of the Health Service Executive, National Council on Ageing and Older People and the Equality Authority partnership and the specialised support from the Equality Authority; (2) linkage with high profile Equality Authority age discrimination cases; (3) strategic/holistic approach that is mainstreamed into customer care/service policies; (4) direct consultation with older client groups;(5) stakeholder sense of being involved in longer term rather than project driven process; (6) availability of development funding to sectoral participants to encourage and support their involvement in training, conferences etc.; (7) the quality of training provided.

[*Public Information Centre*]

The Public Information Centre of the Equality Authority provides information on the working of the Employment Equality Acts 1998 and 2008, the Equal Status Acts 2000 and 2008. The Public Information Centre also makes information available on the Maternity Protection Acts 1994 and 2004, the Adoptive Leave Acts 1995 and 2005, and the Parental Leave Acts 1998 and 2006. All queries to the Public Information Centre, via telephone call, email, fax or post, are recorded to a central database. This database and the nature of the calls recorded allow us to monitor how effective the campaign is being.

As mentioned previously, each year a sectoral based project is initiated. The theme for this project is selected by a pre-planning meeting of the the stakeholders involved, however valuable information about issues which are currently affecting older people can be determined from the types of queries which are recorded through the Public Information Centre.

[*Media Monitoring*]

Media coverage of the event and articles related to the campaign are monitored closely. The promotion of the week presents the opportunity for increased quantities of media interviews e.g. radio interviews, which allow the Equality Authority to monitor how the issue is being covered across the country.

[*Social Networking*]

As part of the campaign, social media outlets are used. These include Facebook, Twitter and Facebook adverts. These are monitored using ‘insight’ programmes to gauge the level of interaction with our promotions.

[*Data Collection/Surveys*]

Short survey forms are handed out at the end of every event such as the launch, seminar or training (See Appendix Two). These allow us to evaluate all events and our campaign. There are also opportunities for attendees to become members of our mailing list for further information targeting.

9) Lessons learned and pitfalls to be avoided

With decreasing funds available, the focus of the campaign had to be addressed. While the public awareness campaign has been successful, the issue has been raised that it is the attempt to change service providers’ behaviour that is more important than the views of the general mass-market campaign. A valuable lesson to take away from the Say No To Ageism project is that practical initiatives which target and provide tailored training for specific sectors can often have a very beneficial outcome. This is not to detract from the work of attempting to develop a public wide debate over the issue, but it is a testament to the Say No To Ageism campaign’s success that this awareness was backed up with developing changes at sectoral level.

A further lesson learned is in the choice of medium used to target a specific group – in this case older people – and bearing that in mind when developing any strategy. The Say No To Ageism campaign has always relied upon striking posters which convey the central ‘I Say No to Ageism’ message, while also provoking some thought or debate on the matter.

The first of the series of posters for the Say No to Ageism campaign was produced in 2005.

EA_1.jpg The 2005 poster challenges the public to see past external age whether at the younger or older trajectory of lived experience, to the person within.

EA_2.jpg The poster for the 2006 campaign was of a long line of birthday candles representing a celebration of ageing while also encouraging everyone to reflect on the stereotypes of older and younger people that we hold.

EA_3.jpg The 2007 poster campaign highlighted some of the findings from an ageism survey that was conducted on behalf of the Equality Authority and asked viewers to consider their own attitude to ageism.

EA_4.jpg The 2008 Say No to Ageism Week drew further attention to how older people are stereotyped by society. Outdoor advertising posters showed blackand- white images of older people with the labels “useless”, “grumpy”, “past it”, “burden” and “washed up”, while smiling pictures of younger people, shown in colour, were simply branded by their names: “Steve” and “Lisa”.

There was a wide spectrum of views on the 2008 poster campaign, which sparked some controversy, ranging from it being ‘brilliant and attracted a huge amount of publicity’ to ‘It might have been a bit too clever’. The poster had been misinterpreted, and appeared to offend some people as a result, leading to representations in the Dáil and calls for its removal from health service settings. Feedback from older people appears to have been largely positive however. Most of the stakeholders thought the poster very well designed but it may have been too complex for a public information campaign and would have worked better in a workshop or seminar setting.

10) Additional information
To access a slideshow with all the posters used in the campaign in the past few years, please click here.


[**Targeting and Content*]

1. What prompted the initiation of/your involvement with the week?
2. Who are its target audiences?
3. To what extent is it reaching those audiences?
4. Are there some groups that are harder to engage than others?
5. Which target audiences should be the prioritized and why?
6. How well are the key messages of Say No to Ageism week being communicated? (highlighting ageism and how it operates, i.e. stereotyping, and the message of promoting positive ageing)
7. Do those messages need to be refined or re-prioritised in any way?

[**Strategy and Tactics*]

8. The strategy in the past balanced promotional activity with direct action, how do you think this strategy is going to shift in light of budgetary constraints?

9. Which elements:

  • a launch event;
  • a conference with a Say No to Ageism theme;
  • an advertising and media campaign;
  • action plans developed by different sectors in association with the Equality Authority to support the initiative in the year ahead

…worked well in past? How do you know – what evidence is there?

10. What is the main rationale for the week from 2009 onwards?
11. What (if any) changes in strategy are needed?
12. What (if any) changes in tactics are needed?

[**Budget and Resources*]

13. Can you quantify the in-kind support your organisation provided to the Say No Week?
14. How effectively have the resources for the week been utilised?
15. Can you identify any cost savings that could be made?
16. What should the future priorities be in the context of smaller budget?
17. Is the timing of the Say No Week optimal/ any changes needed?
18. What are your views on the effectiveness of the partnership structure?
19. Do you have any further comments about any aspect of the initiative?


[**Conference Feedback Questionnaire for the Launch of Say No To Ageism – 30th May 2011*]

Please scale the following aspects of the event on a 1–5 basis, where 5 signifies “yes, agree strongly”, and 1 signifies “no, disagree strongly”:

1. Did the event match your needs?
2. Did you gain relevant knowledge and information?
3. Will you be able to apply such knowledge and information in your work?


Communications GPG

Developing a website (Spain)


Organized by the Council for the Promotion of Equal Treatment and Non-Discrimination of People on the Grounds of Racial & Ethnic Origin

[**(Read the text below or download the report by the Race and Ethnic Equality Council)*]

1) What was the context at that time?

The Spanish Ethnic & Racial Equality Body was created in 2007 and formally constituted in September 2009 which is currently ascribed to the Ministry of Health, Social Policy and Equality through the Secretary of State of Equality. This body currently has 28 members from a variety of organizations dealing with race & ethnic non-discrimination policies (national, regional and local public administrations; trade unions; enterprises associations; NGOs).

At that moment in time, the information available to us gave us the following picture:

  • According to the Eurobarometer “Discrimination in the EU 2009”, citizens in Spain consider discrimination based on ethnic origin to be the most widespread in their country. In fact, one third of the respondents of the survey consider that having a different ethnic background puts people at a disadvantage position when looking for a job. Several studies (National Barometer, Spanish Observatory on Racism and Xenophobia) confirm this: more than 50% of respondents of the National Barometer consider that discrimination based on ethnic and racial origin is frequent or very frequent.
  • Although Spain doesn’t consider itself a racist or xenophobic society, there has been a raise in the past years of xenophobic and racist attitudes from certain groups associated with sports, music and social networks on the internet, especially since the beginning of the financial crisis. In fact, the Raxen report 2010 reveals that groups, platforms or political parties close to far right movements are gaining relevance within society by organizing demonstrations and using internet as a means to disseminate propaganda against immigration and diversity and justifying hate, discrimination, violence, racism and intolerance. Some target people from a different ethnic or racial background, whereas others target the Roma community; it is difficult to know what is more frequent: racism, xenophobia, etc. The main issues the Council is facing are the lack of consistent data around discrimination and a lack of awareness from society, especially from vulnerable groups in regards to their rights in cases of being discriminated against.

According to the National Barometer 2008, two thirds of the population is unaware of their rights should they be victims of discrimination and have very little knowledge of the existence of equality bodies. In addition, according to the Eurobarometer 2009, only 18% of respondents would turn to an equality body after being discriminated against, preferring instead to turn to trade unions or associations (probably due to a lack of knowledge about EBs in Spain). As indicated by several NGOs, vulnerable groups are frequently sceptical about trusting public authorities and the judicial system as their experience with these institutions when making a claim has failed in many cases.

For this reason, our strategy to reach vulnerable groups and gaining their trust was to build an effective channel of communication based on:

[*1. Going digital:*] through the Council’s website we wanted to reach (potential) victims of discrimination as well as professionals working in this field (as mentioned above).

[*2. Going local and in partnership:*] through the network of assessment and advice offices created with eight NGOs with experience in either dealing with cases of discrimination or dealing with target groups, we aimed at achieving a double objective: working in partnership with organizations that were in contact with (potential) victims at the same time as reaching the target group at local level.

By combining a digital approach with a local partnership the Council expected to reach those (potential) victims that were familiar with new technologies at the same time as reaching people who prefer one-to-one contact, through local offices.

In January 2010, we therefore started implementing the first action plan 2010-2012, with a key focus on assistance to victims, data collection and new statistics, and information and awareness-raising. This led to the launch of:

  • The Network of Assessment and Advice offices throughout Spain (July 2010).
  • The website (November 2010):

The starting point

Before designing the website’s design, structure and content, we did a brief analysis to check whether we had selected the correct target audiences. According to this brief study:

  • The vast majority of stakeholders were not aware of the existence the Council:

– Education centres (schools/universities)
– Police forces
– Judges/prosecutors/lawyers
– National, regional and local government
– Media
– Medium and small NGOs
– Victims of discrimination
– General public

  • The organisations with more knowledge on the existence of the Council were people working or volunteering in:

– National, regional and local governments’ departments involved in equality, nondiscrimination and immigration/Roma policies
– Main national trade unions
– Main national NGOs especially involved in activities targeted at immigrants and Roma or social inclusion, particularly those that are members of the Council (10 NGOs)
– National NGOs working in the field of equality, non-discrimination and hate crimes (3-4 organisations)

This analysis led the Council to the conclusion that even if on the long-term the duty of the Council was to communicate with all stakeholders, the limited resources available did not make it possible. It was therefore necessary to prioritise the two most important:

  • Workers/volunteers dealing with equality and non-discrimination
  • Victims of discrimination

The reasons for choosing these two audiences were based on the idea that by reaching the organisations closer to you, one can multiply its communication impact:

  • Reaching workers/volunteers that are already aware of the existence of the Council would not need a lot of communication effort or resources as they already have an interest on the topic and on the activities and information delivered by the Council.
  • Workers/volunteers of national, regional, local authorities and NGOs dealing with equality and non-discrimination are more likely to be in contact with victims of discrimination or discriminators but also other key stakeholders.

  • Planning Phase: content of the briefing

After selecting the audiences, the Council drafted a briefing, which identified the following content.

[*1. Objectives*]

  • Workers/volunteers:

– Increase their understanding/knowledge of anti-discrimination legislation and policies
– Create a section with practical tools on how to better deal with/prevent

  • (Potential) victims of discrimination:

– Increase their understanding/knowledge of their rights and where to go or
who to contact to receive assessment and advice.
– Encourage them to complaint.

[*2. Communication style and language*]

Taking into account the audiences selected, it was considered appropriate to use simple language as well as a direct tone (one to one) to give a sense of closeness. The idea was to keep institutional text to the minimum.

[*3. Key messages*]

The Council agreed 3 messages that would have to be taken into account when drafting the content:

1) Discrimination is illegal.

2) People have the right to complaint when discriminated against.

3) Diversity is an asset of our societies: managing it is enriching.

[*4. Content and structure*]

Taking into account the previous information, it was decided to develop a structure through which the target audiences could identify themselves through the content. We therefore created two boxes at the right part of the home site (as shown in the image): the first one targeted at (potential) victims of discrimination “Have you been discriminated?” and the second one targeted at professionals “Do you work in equality?”. In addition to these, we developed a structure based on relevant information for both audiences

The Council Discrimination Your rights Assessment offices Key tools News
*The Chair
*Our mission
*Working Plan
*What is
*What is equality?
*Where can we find discrimination
more commonly?
*Key statistics
*Who is who
*What to
do if you
have been discriminated?
*The law
*Map of
points with
contact details
*The law
*Who is who

[*5. Dissemination*]

In this section we unfortunately did not have enough budget to design a comprehensive dissemination strategy with an agency. However, we agreed a few actions based on our assets:

1) All press releases would include a reference to the website

2) All members were encouraged to add a link to the new website in their sites.

3) All NGOs part of the Assessment & Advice Offices were to include a link in their sites and encouraged to include news in their newsletters.

[*6. Outputs*]

1) 1 new content uploaded per month

2) 1,000 monthly visits the first year.

3) Increase of cases dealt through the website.

[*7. Indicators*]

  • Number of visits
  • Number of pages seen
  • Average of pages seen per visitor
  • Average time spent on the site
  • Origin of visits
  • Percentage of new visitors
  • Number of cases that have come through the website

[*8. Evaluation*]

1) Frequency of evaluation: it was decided to evaluate the results every three months in order to assess if the strategy needed reinforcement

2) Tools: google analytics and case forms (question: how did you know of the existence of this service + cases received by e-mail)

Note: unfortunately, we only have data until May 2011 as the Ministry decided it was not appropriate to use google analytics as it gave out information considered reserved. During the summer the site had a content manager upgrade which stopped data collection, which means there is a lack of information between June and September.

The data available shows the following results:

Indicator 2010
Trimester 4
Trimester 1
Number of news uploaded 4 4
Number of news uploaded 8.545 12.944 (increase of 66%)
Total number of visits 2.040 2.914 (increase of 47%)
Average time spent on the site 3min y 35sec 2min y 52sec
Origin of visits 67,70% direct
22,90% reference sites
(, twitter &
9,31% search sites
41,64% direct
27, 77% reference sites
(, twitter &
31,59% search sites
Percentage of new visitors 67,75% 72,3%
Number of cases through website Not available yet Not available yet

[*9. Management*]

Currently, the Council only has one full-time staff member dedicated to the implementation of the action plan. It was therefore decided to include this activity within her daily work. Taking this into account, the number of hours spent on this is very limited: an average of 2 hours per week. This of course has an impact on the outputs and results, which are kept to the minimum.


Communications GPG

Home Care Inquiry campaign (United Kingdom)


Organised by the Equality and Human Rights Commission

Suggestions and advice for making a campaign more effective

  • Try not to ‘recycle’ information from one audience to another (e.g. do not lift word for word information from a press release to put into an invitation letter). It is of course fine to repeat basic facts, and indeed you probably would if you were talking about something in legal terms, but do tailor your information to your audience.
  • One example of good practice was used in the campaign in relation to inclusivity, related to the Commission’s consultation events on its strategic plan/equality scheme/grants.
  • To ensure that they were as inclusive as possible, the organisers arranged some of their consultations in smaller, regional venues. This helped them ensure they were accessible to communities and stakeholders who find it difficult, or who may be put off by attending events in large cities.
  • Items which usually get people’s attention are ‘real life examples’ – human interest, case studies, interviews, etc. Use the following link to see video clips and other media linked to the Commission’s Disability Harassment Inquiry and the launch of its report.
  • Good use of statistics can help get the audience’s attention (e.g. the Sex and Power publication, showing the position of women in society, and their under-representation in high powered jobs/positions).