Right, a lot of comments bypassing the issue with the constant "Socioeconomic", "lets start at school" reason that is running trend here. As much as you like to cloud your minds with "socioeconomic" and access on repeat, you are actively participating in dismissing the issue and fully passing the buck to educational establishments for not having diverse pupils. Practices take some accountability. Unless you skim read "Life In Practice". Re-read. The clear issue is the attitude towards BAME people both staff and students (dislike the term to group ethnic minorities together) as per the comments in the survey but right now black architectural members in are the focus of issues in terms of experience in practice and education.
It is annoying that a lot of professionals on here are using the access sole issue when practices are gatekeepers to access as well (e.g. Chris Darling). Recruitment is a real issue in itself because if anyone has properly read the article many comments are associated with racism in the professional environment. The treatment of black staff in practices is horrifying just watch 'Decolonising Architecture' by BFA and try and justify your positions once more. This issues runs so deep from work place exclusion to lacking opportunities to be exposed to real life experience when one white staff member is shown the ropes in one week. We've seen this countless times.
Practices go as far to make sure they associate themselves with the Stephen Lawrence Partnership but where is the same eagerness to create a diverse and far environment at work. Where us your willingness to hire black and asian staff? They do certainly exist. You don't choose them because of a "foreign" sounding name, not white passing BAME, do not think they will "fit in" (we know why). Whilst scholarships are great incentives what happens when that black student doesn't achieve employment incomparison to a student that got in because of connections, not talent? It took anger for lack of diversity for London Southward Council to reflect on its framework. All these actions are simply performative and disingenous.
Stop asking black people methods of how to be inclusive. Make your on consious effort if you "care". They shouldn't have to be the one to explain how to be diverse in a system of racism they never created. This is draining to many black professionals and students.
It has really come to my attention that this issue needs to be treated separately because you are comparing gender with race. Just re-read your headline "AJ100 2020: Women are gaining ground in the profession, but not BAME architects" What if you're a woman and BAME? How does that effect the results? Tell people. Unfortunately, you will have to breakdown to the individual groups itself (B...A...ME). Clumping groups of people in accordance to their differences into one large group is simply misleading and can be manipulated by practices.
It has also come to my attention the uproar people have for other issues unimportant, but when it comes to diversity it is all so silent. It is very telling. Many are praising on another prospective RIBA President who again won't make radical changes making the experience between All women and Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic professionals better. Just look at staff images published by practices of "equal opportunities" practices that says it all. No practice should call themselves an equal opportunities employer if they don't even have a the diverse staff to prove it. Also, don't just observe "Architects" what about the architectural assistants? It affects those looking for jobs who have to witness this daily.
Again and again with vague stats and to be frank practices consciously do not care. Attend one meeting and will call it a day.