Success of shortlisted NHS job applicants
Published
There is a new version of this page. View the latest version.
- 1. Navigate to Main facts and figures section
- 2. Navigate toSuccess of shortlisted applicants to NHS jobs by ethnicity and area section
- 3. Navigate toSuccess of shortlisted applicants to NHS jobs by ethnicity and trust type section
- 4. Navigate to Methodology section
- 5. Navigate to Data sources section
- 6. Navigate to Download the data section
1. Main facts and figures
- overall, White applicants who were shortlisted for an NHS job in England in 2016/17 were more likely to be appointed compared with shortlisted applicants from the ‘Other’ ethnic group (all other ethnic groups combined)
- the same pattern was found in all 4 regions, although the difference in the likelihood of White shortlisted applicants being appointed to that of those from the Other ethnic group was largest in London and smallest in the Midlands and East region
- White shortlisted applicants were more likely to be appointed than those from the Other ethnic group in all 4 types of NHS trust, with the relative difference largest in community provider trusts
- shortlisted applicants from the Other ethnic group were least likely to be appointed in London, compared with the other 3 regions, and in community provider trusts, compared with the other 3 types of trust
Things you need to know
The data presents information about only 1 stage in the application process – how successful applicants from the 2 broad ethnic groups were after being shortlisted. It is possible that people from different ethnic groups are more or less successful at other stages of the application process. Because this data does not include the numbers of applicants for posts, it is not possible to say how likely applicants from each broad group were to be shortlisted, or how likely they were to be appointed following their application.
Applicants reported their ethnicity on their job application form. Those who did not report their ethnicity are not included in calculating the percentages. We do not know how many applicants did not declare their ethnicity, nor whether applicants from certain ethnic groups were more or less likely to declare their ethnicity when applying for posts, or if non-reporting was higher in some trusts than in others.
The vacancies available in each trust, region and trust type vary by types of role and grade. Certain roles or grades may have a higher likelihood of appointment from shortlisting, and people from some ethnic groups may be more likely to apply for these.
You can get the data for each trust if you download the data file. Across trusts, there is a wide variation in the percentage of applicants who were appointed from shortlisting in both ethnic groups. This may reflect differences in recruitment practices, or be due to other factors. Caution should be used when the number of people shortlisted from either ethnic groups within a trust is small, as the likelihood of a successful appointment will be affected by small changes in the numbers appointed.
The percentages are based on data from the 232 NHS trusts (out of 235) who provided and confirmed the relevant data.
What the data measures
This data measures the percentage of shortlisted applicants for NHS jobs who were subsequently appointed for the job during the 2016/17 financial year (1 April 2016 to 31 March 2017). The data includes both internal and external applicants, and is broken down by ethnicity into:
- White applicants
- applicants from all other ethnic groups combined (referred to here as the ‘Other’ ethnic group)
To show how much more or less likely a White applicant was to be appointed following shortlisting than an applicant from the Other ethnic group, the ‘relative likelihood’ is also given in the download file and commentary. This is calculated by dividing the percentage of shortlisted White applicants who were appointed by the percentage of shortlisted applicants from the Other ethnic group who were appointed.
A relative likelihood of 2.0 would mean that a White shortlisted applicant was 2 times as likely as a shortlisted applicant from the Other ethnic group to be appointed. A relative likelihood of 0.5 would mean that a White shortlisted applicant was half as likely to be appointed as a shortlisted applicant from the Other ethnic group.
Data is also presented for 4 broad regions in England and the 4 types of NHS trust.
The regions in England are grouped as follows:
- London (covering Greater London)
- Midlands and East (covering the West Midlands, the East Midlands and the East)
- North (covering the North West, the North East, and Yorkshire and the Humber)
- South (covering the South East and the South West)
The types of trust are:
- acute
- ambulance
- community provider
- mental health
The data does not include job applicants for:
- public bodies like Public Health England and the Care Quality Commission
- independent (non-NHS) healthcare providers
- social enterprises
- clinical commissioning groups
The ethnic categories used in this data
For this data, ethnicity was categorised into the following 2 broad ethnic groups to increase the reliability of the data:
- White – including White British and White ethnic minorities
- Other – all other ethnic groups
2. Success of shortlisted applicants to NHS jobs by ethnicity and area
| Region | White | Other |
|---|---|---|
| % | % | |
| All | 19.2 | 12.0 |
| London | 18.2 | 10.0 |
| Midlands & East | 17.9 | 13.3 |
| North | 20.8 | 13.5 |
| South | 19.0 | 12.8 |
Download table data for ‘Success of shortlisted applicants to NHS jobs by ethnicity and area’ (CSV) Source data for ‘Success of shortlisted applicants to NHS jobs by ethnicity and area’ (CSV)
Summary of Success of shortlisted NHS job applicants Success of shortlisted applicants to NHS jobs by ethnicity and area Summary
This data shows that:
- overall, 19.2% of White shortlisted applicants to NHS jobs in England in 2016/17 were appointed, compared with 12.0% of shortlisted applicants from the Other ethnic group – this means White shortlisted applicants were 1.6 times as likely to be appointed as shortlisted applicants from the Other ethnic group
- in London, 10.0% of shortlisted applicants from the Other ethnic group were appointed, the lowest percentage out of all 4 regions
- in London, 18.2% of White shortlisted applicants were appointed, making them 1.8 times as likely to be appointed as those in the Other ethnic group – this was the highest relative difference out of all 4 regions
- in the Midlands and East, White shortlisted applicants were 1.3 times as likely to be appointed as shortlisted applicants from the Other ethnic group, the lowest relative difference out of all 4 regions; in these trusts 17.9% of White shortlisted applicants and 13.3% of applicants from the Other ethnic group were appointed
3. Success of shortlisted applicants to NHS jobs by ethnicity and trust type
| Type of trust | White | Other |
|---|---|---|
| % | % | |
| All | 19.2 | 12.0 |
| Ambulance trusts | 23.1 | 13.6 |
| Community trusts | 15.7 | 7.2 |
| Acute trusts | 20.0 | 12.7 |
| Mental health trusts | 16.5 | 10.0 |
Download table data for ‘Success of shortlisted applicants to NHS jobs by ethnicity and trust type’ (CSV) Source data for ‘Success of shortlisted applicants to NHS jobs by ethnicity and trust type’ (CSV)
Summary of Success of shortlisted NHS job applicants Success of shortlisted applicants to NHS jobs by ethnicity and trust type Summary
This data shows that:
- in 2016/17, shortlisted applicants to jobs in community provider trusts had the lowest likelihood of being appointed out of all 4 trust types, with 15.7% of White shortlisted applicants and 7.2% of shortlisted applicants from the Other ethnic group appointed
- White shortlisted applicants in community provider trusts were 2.2 times as likely to be appointed as those from the Other ethnic group – this was the highest relative difference out of all 4 types of trust
4. Methodology
Data was collated by each trust from sources including NHS Jobs (the application system) and the Electronic Staff Record (ESR), and it was recorded manually in some trusts. Trusts then submitted the data using the Unify2 online collection system, which allows all trusts to share their data with NHS England. The data presented here is based on the figures submitted to NHS England as at December 2017.
235 out of 238 NHS trusts (99%) provided data. The remaining 3 (1%) of trusts either did not submit data or the data was not of sufficient quality (for example, data contained errors or anomalies).
The 2 ethnic categories used allow comparison with other data collected on the NHS workforce by ethnicity.
Rounding
Percentages are given to 1 decimal place. You can see unrounded data if you download the data file.
Related publications
This data is also presented in Indicator 2 of NHS England’s Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES).
Quality and methodology information
5. Data sources
Source
Workforce Race Equality Standard data reporting – December 2017
Type of data
Administrative data
Type of statistic
Official statistics
Publisher
NHS England
Publication frequency
Yearly
Purpose of data source
The purpose of the Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES) is to collect information on differences in the experience and treatment of NHS staff and board members, depending on their ethnicity, with a view to reducing these differences.
6. Download the data
This file contains the following: ethnicity, NHS trust, NHS trust code, geography, NHS trust type, numerator, denominator, value, relative likelihood