Trusted by
Internal HR systems can't capture intersectional identities. Employees won't disclose honestly on employer-owned platforms. The result: an EDI picture that's partial, inaccurate, and not fit for strategy. We fix that.
Trusted by
Standard HR platforms cannot record multiple disabilities, handle intersectional ethnic identities, or capture socioeconomic background. Workforce data built on these systems is structurally incomplete — not because of low effort, but because the tools don't allow it.
Employees who believe their responses might be seen — however remote that risk — consistently report more positively than they would anonymously. Internal surveys systematically overstate how well an organisation is performing on inclusion. Not dishonesty: psychology.
When a significant proportion of staff selects "prefer not to say" on identity questions, it signals distrust — not neutrality. Underrepresented groups are disproportionately likely to withhold data on employer systems, which means the gap is worst where insight is most needed.
A secure, independent platform. A 5–7 minute survey. A formal report with SMART recommendations. Here is what that looks like in practice.
We deploy a secure survey platform — entirely separate from your HR systems and employer-owned tools. Employees disclose to an independent third party. We capture all protected characteristics, non-protected characteristics (caregiving, education, socioeconomic background), intersectional identities, and inclusion sentiment.
We analyse where representation gaps exist across the talent pipeline: at hiring, at progression, at leadership. We identify where the data is missing — and what that absence tells us. Anonymisation is embedded at every stage; no individual is exposed regardless of how underrepresented their group is.
Using the audit findings, we help you set data-driven, achievable targets — not aspirational statements. Targets that are specific to what your data shows, not what the sector average looks like.
Recommendations are SMART: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound. The formal report identifies the highest-leverage interventions — the ones most likely to shift the specific metrics your data reveals, not generic best practice.
The audit is designed as the start of an ongoing measurement cycle, not a one-off report. Regular audits allow you to track year-on-year improvement, evidence progress to boards and external stakeholders, and demonstrate the data-driven approach required for B-corp JEDI certification, investor reporting, and regulatory compliance.
Four guides designed for the moment you're in right now — whether you're building the case internally, approaching B-corp revalidation, or ready to act.
Understand the specific reasons internal EDI data fails — system limitations, social desirability bias, and what "prefer not to say" actually means. Includes a practical checklist for assessing your current data quality.
An interactive assessment for B-corp certified companies approaching revalidation. Maps the JEDI questions you'll need to answer against the data you currently hold — and flags exactly where the gaps are.
A direct, evidence-led guide built around one provable argument: most EDI strategies fail not because of lack of commitment, but because of lack of precision — and lack of precision starts with inaccurate data.
For the person who needs to justify the investment internally. Includes a one-page board summary template and the ROI framing — what the audit produces, what decisions it enables, and what acting on poor data costs.
The Equal Group were integral to achieving our target. Their independent approach gave us data we simply could not have obtained internally — and the recommendations were specific enough to act on immediately.
30 minutes. No pitch, no pressure — just a conversation about what an independent EDI audit could look like for your organisation and whether it's the right fit right now.