Guest blog: Anti-racist practice in the third sector- what does real change demand of all of us?

Today we’re sharing a guest blog from Aneela McKenna and Dr Karla Perez Portilla, who worked with us to develop Close the Gap’s anti-racist practice strategy. Their insights and challenge have been central to shaping this work, and to pushing us to think more deeply about what meaningful, sustained organisational change requires.

Over the past year, we worked closely with Aneela and Karla to examine our policies and practice through an anti-racist lens. This included an external audit, all-staff training, and a series of workshops that created space for reflection, discomfort, and learning. Together, this process helped us move from commitment to action, and informed the development of our strategy. In this blog, they reflect on what an intersectional and anti-racist approach demands in practice, drawing on their experience of working with us and across the wider third sector.

Karla: I met Aneela in October 2004 when we began our MSc in Equality and Discrimination at the University of Strathclyde – over twenty years ago. We connected from the first day. We were young women from adversely racialised backgrounds, both driven to make a difference.

At the time, Aneela was the first Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Officer at the University of Glasgow, while I was a Chevening Scholar from Mexico, having just published my first book On the Principle of Equality. Since then, we have taken on many roles.

I have worked across academia, the public and third sectors on anti-racist and anti-discrimination projects, focusing on making anti-discrimination law more accessible and effective. Aneela has led equality programmes in the public sector and now runs her own consultancy, Mòr Diversity. After more than twenty years, we have come together again to support Close the Gap’s anti-racist work – a collaboration that has deepened our bond and shared commitment to meaningful change.

A collaborative reflection

This blog is a collaborative reflection structured around three questions. Karla leads on the first, Aneela on the second, and we address the third together.

1.What does the third sector need to do to take a genuinely intersectional and anti-racist approach?

Karla: A good starting point is to ask some honest and fundamental questions: why do we want to take this approach, and why now? Who are our services, goods, and employment structures designed for, by whom, and for what purpose? And who actually benefits from them in practice?

The question of why is crucial because it shapes motivation. When action is driven primarily by fashion, funding requirements, or political pressure, it is rarely sustainable. Meaningful change requires genuine compassion because fairness and dignity matter, not because we are being watched. As Fannie Lou Hamer reminded us, nobody is free until all of us are free.

Asking who our services really work for brings intersectionality into sharp focus. Deconstructing privilege is not about blame or punishment; it is about examining how resources, access, and advantage are distributed and whether they can be shared more equitably. A universal approach — treating everyone the same — may appear fair, but in practice it often is not. Offering everyone a seat at the table assumes the same chair works for all, when in reality, different people need different forms of support. Intersectionality helps us design systems that deliver substantive, not merely formal, equality.

I therefore suggest a three-part approach:

• first, clearly declare an intention to be anti-racist and intersectional;
• second, commit to specific, measurable changes; and
• third, sustain action over time. Fairness and inclusion are not end points but ongoing commitments that must be actively maintained.

Aneela: Karla is right: commitment must be sustainable. The third sector often follows funding and policy, but it cannot lose its active role in building an intersectional and anti-racist approach. Too often, communities are treated as homogenous groups. We must recognise the multiple identities people hold and ensure services truly meet their needs.

Gender equality work cannot advance without an anti-racist lens. Kimberlé Crenshaw’s concept of intersectionality emerged because feminist approaches that focused only on more privileged women erased the compounded oppression faced by adversely racialised women. This is a critical moment for the third sector to challenge the racist narratives embedded in everyday life through social media, political discourse, and our daily conversations. We need collective action and a unified voice that says racism is not welcome. Commitment alone is not enough; we need sustained action, intentional representation, and a long-term focus.

2.What are examples of good practice?

Aneela: There is no perfect model, but I look for good practice within specific workstreams. One thing organisations fear most is often the best way to becoming anti-racist: delivering programmes for adversely racialised groups or setting diversity targets. People say this takes opportunities away from others. But positive action (which is lawful, unlike positive discrimination) is a vital tool – proactive outreach, leadership programmes, bringing adversely racialised people into decision-making. As Sir Geoffrey Palmer once said, “talent is everywhere, opportunity is not.” Positive action helps close the ethnicity gap.

Second, nothing happens without data. When you take a proposal to a board, they need evidence that targeted action is necessary. Data collection should be ongoing from staff, volunteers, the communities you serve as well as those you are failing to reach. Data reveals the inequalities we’d rather not see, providing the hard evidence that makes the status quo indefensible and action unavoidable.

Finally, cultivate partnerships that challenge your institutional thinking and question your practices. Be honest about the model you’re using and what the expectations are; don’t define the relationship as something it isn’t. Be transparent about where the power sits, but also actively address how that power can be redistributed to adversely racialised communities. We cannot claim a process is collaborative if the structural ownership never actually shifts.

Karla: I fully agree on the importance of positive action: it is statistically and morally justified, legally permitted, and a crucial means of fulfilling the UK’s Public Sector Equality Duty. I would like to add a personal reflection. On one occasion, I was asked to identify countries doing anti-racist work ‘better’ than the UK, implying that, in the absence of clear examples, urgent action was unnecessary. This comparison is flawed. Inequality and discrimination are historically produced and deeply contextual. No other country shares the UK’s specific imperial history or has benefited in the same ways from colonial exploitation. The UK must therefore respond seriously to its own history and present realities.

3. So, what does real change demand of all of us?

Karla: Social inequality is not natural; it is made — and what is made can be unmade. We know change is working when it becomes uncomfortable. As I often tell my students, muscles grow because they burn during exercise. Real change is no different: it unsettles and disrupts the status quo. Organisations should therefore recognise discomfort not as failure, but as a sign of progress.

Aneela: Too often, this work is left to the one adversely racialised person on the team—that is not sustainable. Don’t leave them to carry the weight alone. Allocate resources, set strategic goals, and build firm accountability so that equity becomes everyone’s responsibility. Let it come from the board and leadership, not just from those with lived experience. We can all lead with an intersectional lens. True inclusion does not rest on the shoulders of one ‘champion’; it requires a unified movement to turn commitment into lasting change.

Close the Gap launches anti-racist practice strategy for 2026 to 2029

Today we’re publishing Close the Gap’s anti-racist practice strategy for 2026 to 2029. It’s not a document we publish because we’ve arrived somewhere, it’s a public commitment to a journey of organisational change that we know will take sustained effort, honesty, and time. 

Close the Gap exists to advance women’s equality in the labour market, and we know that structural change is necessary to realise this. Systemic inequality must be named and challenged if it is to be dismantled. As Kimberlé Crenshaw’s seminal work on intersectionality makes clear, genuine gender equality cannot be achieved without an explicit anti-racist lens. Centring intersectionality means going further than we have, and this strategy sets out how we’ll do that.  

Our work to get here 

Over the past year, we’ve worked with Aneela McKenna of Mòr Diversity and Dr Karla Perez Portilla, whose subject matter expertise and lived experience has been crucial in this process. Part of this work involved a comprehensive anti-racism external audit of our policies and practice. The findings were uncomfortable but clarifying; Close the Gap had pockets of good practice and genuine commitment, but these were not systematised. Anti-racism principles were not fully integrated into our policies, our project design, our communications, or our culture. Passion without structure isn’t enough. Good intentions without accountability aren’t enough. The strategy is our response to that. 

The process was also shaped by engagement with an external group of racially minoritised women. We’re grateful to them for trusting us and sharing their lived experience. Their involvement was not a tick-box exercise, it was an essential component of this work. 

Why speaking publicly matters 

Close the Gap is a small organisation of eight staff, led by white women, with a majority white workforce. That context matters because it means we need to learn, it shapes how we listen, and it’s why external expertise and lived experience have been central to this process rather than optional extras.  

The current political context is also important. The rise of far-right activism in Scotland and across the UK, and increased racism and anti-migrant rhetoric in public discourse make this work not just an organisational priority but a political necessity. Silence in this climate is not a neutral act. 

Publishing a strategy means being held accountable. Too often, organisations make commitments on anti-racism and gender equality that do not lead to meaningful change. Organisations that never declare publicly rarely do the work at all. We know that accountability requires visibility. And if Close the Gap is asking employers to create anti-racist, gender-competent workplaces, we have an obligation to build one ourselves. 

There will be discomfort, learning, and missteps along the way. The strategy is designed with that reality in mind; it’s iterative, annually reviewed, and grounded in continuous improvement rather than presuming to have all the answers from the outset. 

What we’re committing to 

The strategy sets out our commitment across four interconnected workstreams:  

• how we position ourselves externally and build genuine engagement with racially minoritised women and anti-racism organisations;  
• how we transform our internal culture, systems, and processes;  
• how we embed continuous learning across the whole organisation, both with the staff team and the board; and  
• how we formalise accountability, both for ourselves and in the expectations we place on the employers we work with. 

We’ve developed an evaluation plan with indicators of success, and we’ll publish annual updates sharing what we achieved and, just as importantly, what we didn’t. As a small third sector organisation in an increasingly challenging funding context, capacity is a real barrier. We recognise that learning as we go will present its own challenges, but know that there’s much to be learnt from not getting something right the first time. 

Why this work is essential 

The engagement with our staff team and board over the past year was both authentic and, at times, uncomfortable in exactly the right ways. The guiding principles we’ve arrived at - sitting with discomfort, sharing accountability, centring lived experience, and being open to growth - reflect the genuine commitment and enthusiasm from staff and trustees about the work that we’re doing. 

This strategy also connects directly to the core of Close the Gap’s mission. Racially minoritised women face compounded inequalities in the labour market, in pay and progression, in the way their work is valued, and whether their voices are heard. If we don’t name that, if we allow our work to flatten women’s experiences into one undifferentiated category, we’re part of the problem we claim to be solving. The language of intersectionality has been increasingly adopted, but too often it’s without an understanding of what it means in practice, and without the necessary action to create change for racially minoritised women. 

“You cannot achieve genuine gender equality without an explicit anti-racist lens. If we don’t name that, we’re part of the problem we claim to be solving.”

How we’ll be held to account 

Publishing this strategy is one of the ways we will hold ourselves accountable. We have also built structured accountability mechanisms into the strategy, including setting out clear indicators of success in an evaluation plan that will be regularly reviewed, and a commitment to share annual public updates on progress. Those updates will be honest about what we’ve achieved and where we have fallen short. Our board of trustees also has a critical oversight role both in ensuring the plan is delivered, but also in how they change adapt their own governance practice to be anti-racist. We’re now on a journey to becoming an anti-racist organisation, and that is what advancing justice and equality for all women actually means. 

The Equally Safe at Work Community of Practice: A collaborative learning experience on gender equality at work

On Monday 2^nd March, the Equally Safe at Work Community of Practice welcomed its members back for an in-person event, focusing on the theme of ‘Improving women’s experiences in the workplace’. It was an energised session with lots of new members attending the Community of Practice for the first time, among the familiar faces who have been active members of the peer learning group since its inception.

With increasing pushback towards equality, diversity and inclusion and women’s rights, globally and locally, this type of work and connection to others is more important than ever. The Community of Practice supports this by growing a wide network of peers across sectors, to share learning and to build collective understanding around gender equality employment practice.  

We are grateful to COSLA who supported this event.

Exploring the theme of ‘Improving women’s experiences in the workplace’

To begin the day, Dr Karla Pérez Portilla explored the topic of institutional racism, what this means, how to unpack it using the Structural, Cultural, Institutional and Personal (SCIP) analysis and discussed the power of, and opportunities often missed by, employment legislation like the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED). With ethnicity pay gap reporting soon to be mandatory, and the development of anti-racist action plans within organisations, this provided an opportunity for employers to identify where to improve their practice.

The Community of Practice has always provided the space for cross-sectoral shared learning, which has been a key feature of the group and highly valued. Colleagues from City of Edinburgh Council’s presented information on their approach to pay gap reporting, including their data that looks at the intersection between gender, disability and ethnicity and the importance of transparency about the issues you’re facing, to drive effective change.

We also shared details about Close the Gap’s Fair Work for Young Mothers Project, which is in partnership with Save the Children. The interactive sessions informed members about the barriers young mother’s face in the workplace and also captured attendees views of how young mother’s are perceived in the workplace. The discussion included reflection on what more could be done within members own organisations to promote a workplace inclusive of young mothers.

The value in networking

The Community of Practice only works when members feel able and comfortable sharing their learning and experiences. In every session, members show up ready to listen, learn and reflect. This helps create a collaborative environment where practical ideas, honest reflections and examples of progress and challenges can be openly discussed.

Member’s willingness to contribute, and commitment to supporting one another, by sharing their Equally Safe at Work journey, highlighting good practice examples and sharing of resources are what makes the Community of Practice both meaningful and impactful. Members consistently highlight the benefit of connecting with others across sectors, exchanging ideas and learning from each other’s experiences. They not only continue to attend sessions, but participation is steadily growing as new organisations join. This sustained engagement reflects how valuable participants find the peer learning support network.

As we are aware of how busy the working day can be, with capacity and staffing challenges, attending events might not always be possible. That’s why we created our own Equally Safe at Work Community of Practice KHub page to be a collaborative space where employers could provide further support, exchange information and access resources. Although this is a restricted group page, it’s open to those who are working on Equally Safe at Work and for those interested in joining the programme and/or advancing gender equality within their organisation.

What to expect from the Community of Practice in 2026

Joining the Equally Safe at Work Community of Practice is a great, free and easy way to connect with employers across the public and third sector who are working towards the same goal of advancing gender equality at work.

The sessions in 2026 will continue to focus on key areas that are central to the Equally Safe at Work accreditation programme and will also explore specialised topics including occupational health and safety and gender, and explore different forms of violence against women, such as ‘honour’-based abuse.

The programme of meetings will continue to build on what works and will be shaped by what members would like to see, including more members experiences of going through the process of accreditation, what it’s like reaching certain milestones within the programme and to hear what works well.

Begin your journey now

Visit Equally Safe at Work, for more information.

International Women’s Day 2026: From reporting to action on the gender pay gap

Last week, ahead of International Women’s Day, the UK Government marked a significant shift in pay gap reporting, as it published its new guidance for employers on creating gender pay gap action plans. From April 2026, large employers will be invited to voluntarily publish action plans setting out how they intend to tackle their gender pay gaps and support employees experiencing menopause, with a move to mandatory requirements from April 2027 under provisions in the new Employment Rights Act. 

For Close the Gap and others who have spent years calling for reporting to move beyond transparency alone, this is an important moment with great potential for change – but whether it becomes a real turning point will depend on what happens next. 

A brief history: transparency without teeth 

The UK Government introduced mandatory gender pay gap reporting in 2017, requiring large employers to publish data on differences in average hourly pay, bonuses, and the distribution of men and women across pay quartiles.

This was a major step forward. It made pay inequality visible. It created public scrutiny. It put the issue on the agenda of boards and senior leadership teams, many for the first time. 

But from the outset reporting was not enough. At Close the Gap, our five-year assessment of Scottish employer reporting showed that, while awareness had increased, progress was slow and uneven. Too many employers were publishing figures without meaningful analysis of the causes of their gap, and a large majority of employers didn’t publish any action to address pay inequality in their organisation. Transparency alone has not closed the gap. 

That’s why we have consistently advocated for mandatory action plans, supported by effective accountability mechanisms.

What’s changing in 2026? 

Under the new approach, employers will be required to: 

• Publish an action plan alongside their gender pay gap data. 
• Select at least two actions from a government-hosted portal of suggested interventions. 
• Provide progress updates on those actions in subsequent years. 
• Publish their plans and updates on the gender pay gap portal. 

This approach will be voluntary from April 2026, and mandatory from April 2027. The Government has already launched its guidance to support employers, including encouraging diagnosis of the causes of their pay gap, setting timelines, and considering the impact of menopause, intersectionality, and culture change.

This is welcome progress. For the first time employers will be required not just to disclose gender inequality, but to say what they’re doing about it. 

The opportunities and risks 

The introduction of action plans on the gender pay gap and menopause represents an important and positive shift. Action is now part of the framework, signalling that reporting must lead to action, and that government may strengthen regulation if progress stalls. 

This is a critical moment for women’s labour market equality, and there is much potential for progress. But the way employers respond to the new regulatory framework will determine whether it becomes a compliance exercise or a catalyst for real change.

A floor or a ceiling? 

The regulations cover employers with 250+ employees, from those just above the threshold to organisations with many thousands of staff. Yet the minimum requirement is the same for all: two actions, one on their gender pay gap and one on menopause.

While two actions may be proportionate for a smaller employer with fewer resources and structures in place, larger employers with significant resources have the ability to go further, faster – if they choose to.

We know that there are already examples out there of employers taking meaningful action that has narrowed their pay gaps and created more equal workplaces for women. But there is a risk that those employers who are less motivated could treat the minimum requirement of two actions as a ceiling, rather than a floor.

This is a moment of opportunity. The UK Government can be clear in its messaging that the framework sets a minimum, not a maximum. Employers that are serious about tackling their gender pay gap can go further by selecting multiple, high-impact actions and embedding them within wider workforce strategies. Those that do so will not only make faster progress, but demonstrate leadership in a space where employees, customers and clients increasingly expect it.

Getting the foundations right: data analysis 

We know that the better quality and more successful actions are those that are evidence based. However, one crucial action that is missing is a requirement that employers undertake an analysis of their gender pay gap in order to identify its causes. Without mandatory analysis action risks being poorly targeted and low or no impact.

This leads to the question of how an employer should know which actions to choose. If an employer hasn’t done an analysis, they are more likely to select actions that don’t reflect the issues at play in their organisation.

We know that employers who take evidence-based action see a greater return on their investment in equality than those who don’t. Understanding and using your data is the most efficient way to close your gender pay gap. And seeing that change come through in your data year on year is a great motivator to keep going. 

Next month, the UK Government will be publishing further guidance setting out how employers can analyse their gender pay gap data and use this as a basis for their action plans. This is an opportunity to help employers to get their foundations right, so analysis becomes part of the furniture, and they can focus on other actions.

The role of scrutiny and accountability 

The evidence tells us that transparency without enforcement does not guarantee progress. We are concerned that there are no clear mechanisms to assess the quality of gender pay gap and menopause action plans, no minimum standards for impact, and no consequences for employers than don’t follow through on their commitments. That presents a risk that these action plans become procedural rather than transformative. 

However, public accountability is important. Action plans and progress updates will sit alongside gender pay gap data, open to scrutiny by employees, trade unions, the media and future recruits. This could be a motivator for employers in an era of heightened equality scrutiny, where brand reputation is critical.

The next few years will show whether reputational pressure and public scrutiny are sufficient, or whether stronger accountability measures will ultimately be required. 

Many Scottish working women are being left behind 

The UK gender pay gap reporting regulations cover all employers with 250+ staff in Scotland, England and Wales, as well as public bodies in England and Wales. Scottish public bodies publish their gender pay gap under the Scottish-specific duties of the public sector equality duty. 

The result is that Scottish public bodies will not be mandated to publish gender pay gap action plans, leaving a big gap in action and accountability. Most Scottish public bodies aren’t taking action to close their pay gaps. The UK Government has made a change to make action plans mandatory – it’s time for Scottish Government to do the same for our public bodies. Women working in Scotland’s public sector, many of whom are in undervalued, low-paid work, cannot be left behind.

The year ahead: a test phase 

The voluntary reporting year from April 2026 is critical. It provides an opportunity to see how employers respond when action plans are encouraged but not yet mandatory. Do they go beyond the minimum? Do they diagnose the root causes of their gap? Do they choose ambitious, evidence-based actions?

We know there are some great examples of employers who have used gender pay gap reporting as a basis for action in their organisations, who have made big strides in closing their gender pay gaps and in creating more inclusive workplaces for women. This is therefore a real opportunity to secure this kind of change on a greater scale. However, there is persistent evidence that many employers will not take steps on equality unless legally required.

We therefore hope the Government uses lessons from the 2026 voluntary phase to reflect on what has worked, and what adjustments are necessary to ensure we have a framework that can deliver on its ambitions, before the requirements become mandatory in April 2027. Close the Gap will be continuing our advocacy efforts in this space.

How we can support employers 

Close the Gap has been supporting employers to understand and close their gender pay gap for 25 years. We work one on one with employers every day; delivering gender pay gap analysis, helping employers set targeted actions, and stepping them through implementation so they get things right. 

We’ve also developed a self-assessment tool for employers who have to report their gender pay gap, Close Your Pay Gap. This free to use tool allows employers to answer a series of questions, and receive personalised feedback, and priority themes and actions that get to the heart of what’s going on in their organisation. The tool is ideally placed to support employers who are setting their actions, either for the first time, or for their next phase.

Over the next year we’ll be developing new guidance that steps employers through how to use the tool alongside the gender pay gap portal to select actions that are right for them, and how to put their commitments into practice. 

From action to impact 

International Women’s Day is intended to be a moment of celebration. This year, it’s also a moment of transition. The move toward gender pay gap and menopause action plans acknowledges what gender equality advocates have long argued: we need a regulatory driver to motivate action, and gender pay gap data must lead to change. 

Transparency was the first step. Now we need impact. We’ll be watching what happens over the next year, and will continue to advocate for workplace equality for all women.