What the EHRC Code of Practice Means for Engagement Teams
We’ve pulled together some information to support engagement professionals who need to understand what has happened with the updated EHRC Code of Practice, and how it may impact on the work you do with communities.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has now brought its updated Services Code of Practice into force (August 2026). This follows the 2025 Supreme Court ruling that “sex” in the Equality Act refers to biological sex, and the code sets out how organisations should apply the law when providing single‑sex or separate‑sex services.
Several legal and community organisations have said they intend to challenge aspects of the code or seek further clarification. In this context, it’s important to recognise that changes of this kind can affect how safe, welcome or confident trans people feel when accessing services, which may also influence participation and engagement.
What is the EHRC?
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is the UK’s national equality regulator. It enforces the Equality Act 2010, promotes equality and human rights, and issues statutory Codes of Practice that explain how organisations should comply with the law.
The Services Code of Practice provides guidance for organisations delivering services, public functions or running associations. It does not create new law, but it interprets existing legislation and offers examples of lawful and unlawful treatment.
FAQs: Understanding the EHRC Code of Practice and Engagement
What is the EHRC Services Code of Practice?
It is a statutory code explaining how organisations should apply the Equality Act when providing services, including guidance on single‑sex and separate‑sex services.
What changed in the updated EHRC Code of Practice (2026)?
The updated code reflects the Supreme Court ruling that “sex” means biological sex. It includes new examples relating to digital discrimination and clarifies how proportionality should be assessed when restricting access.
Why are some organisations challenging the updated code?
Several legal and community organisations have said they intend to challenge aspects of the code or seek further clarification. Their concerns relate to how the code may affect trans people’s access to services and how proportionality is applied.
How might these changes affect trans people’s experience of services?
Changes of this kind may influence how safe, welcome or confident trans people feel when accessing services. This can also affect willingness to participate in engagement, consultation or co‑design activities.
What does the updated EHRC Code of Practice mean for engagement teams?
Engagement teams may need to review inclusion statements, digital routes, equality analysis and outreach approaches to ensure activities remain safe, accessible and sensitive to community experience.
What practical steps should engagement teams consider?
Clear inclusion and safety statements
Avoiding unintentionally exclusionary practice
Strengthening digital engagement routes
Updating equality analysis
Targeted outreach through trusted local organisations
Where can I find trusted information about the EHRC update?
See the “Further information and trusted sources” section below.
Implications for engagement teams
Things engagement teams may want to start thinking about, if not already:
Inclusion and safety statements for engagement activities
Practice that avoids unintentionally excluding people
Strengthening digital engagement routes where participants may feel more comfortable
Reviewing equality analysis and what this means for assessing impact and barriers
Targeted outreach and working through trusted local organisations
If you’re reviewing your engagement practice in light of these changes, you may find our Inclusive Engagement Training helpful.
Key points from the updated EHRC Code of Practice
Access to single‑sex services must be based on biological sex
Providers can restrict or modify access for trans people if it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim
Providers must consider less intrusive alternatives and the impact on trans people
Updated examples cover digital discrimination and online service delivery
The protected characteristic remains gender reassignment, with terminology updated to “trans”
Comments