Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Deprivation

The updated version of the English Indices of Deprivation 20071, reveals the following:

                    ...
difficulties in comparing data between different years because of the changes in methodology
and calculation, but this is ...
Table 1 : Average ranks in different deprivations measures at SOA level

                                                 ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Deprivation

870 views

Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Deprivation

  1. 1. Deprivation The updated version of the English Indices of Deprivation 20071, reveals the following: • Barnet is more deprived in relation to other local authority areas than it was in 2004 and is now close to the top third of most deprived authorities in the country • Barnet now has six Local Super Output Areas within the 10% most deprived nationally. Within London, Barnet ranks below the middle point, close to the bottom third of least deprived boroughs • Barnet’s rank on most types of deprivation has risen with the exception of the ‘education, skills and training’ domain which shows an improvement • Burnt Oak and Colindale remain the most deprived wards in Barnet by a significant margin, as was the case in 2004 There is a linear relationship between poor health and deprivation which is compounded by age as summarized in Graph 2. Source: Office for National Statistics data Graph 2: The relationship between death rates in people aged under 75 years and deprivation levels at an electoral ward level. 1300 Standardised all-cause mortality in people 1200 aged under 75 years per 100,000 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 10 15 20 25 30 35 Index of Multiple Deprivation (2007) Interrogating this data further at Super Output Areas (SOA) reveals a patchwork of deprivation which correlates to the location of social housing stock in the borough. Though there are 1 Published by the Department for Communities and Local Government
  2. 2. difficulties in comparing data between different years because of the changes in methodology and calculation, but this is a national phenomenon, not exclusive to Barnet. Index of Multiple Deprivation The Index of Multiple Deprivation uses a number of data sources with key measurements from the Census; educational data; road traffic accidents; modelling to estimate ‘difficulty of access to owner-occupation; measures of the proportion of households for whom a decision has been made on applications for homeless provision assistance; and health data including GP prescribing data, hospital episode statistics, and average distance from a GP surgery. The calculations from 2004 to 2007 reveals that Barnet has become more deprived’. Map 2: Relative deprivation levels in Barnet at census SOA area level Source: Office for National Statistics data High Barnet Underhill Oakley East Barnet Brunswick Park Totteridge Hale Edgware Mill Hill Coppetts West Woodhouse Finchley Burnt Oak Finchley East Church Finchley End Colindale Hendon Garden Index of Multiple West Suburb Deprivation (2007) Hendon Very high Golders High Childs Green Hill Moderate Low Very low The new figures show Barnet to be more deprived than in 2004 in relation to other boroughs in both London and England. This worsening is the largest such change nationally. Of 354 English local authorities, Barnet now ranks the 128th most deprived (65 more so than in 2004) and 21 st out of the 33 London boroughs, three places worse than in 2004 (1 = most deprived). Barnet is thus more deprived than most local authorities in England but less deprived than most London ones. Table 1 shows the relative changes that occurred in the main measures of deprivation in Barnet between 2004 and 2007.
  3. 3. Table 1 : Average ranks in different deprivations measures at SOA level Average rank of Barnet’s superoutput areas Change: IMD measure (out of 32,482 nationally) 2004 to 2007 NOTE 1 = most deprived 2004 2007* Barriers to housing and services (wider) [including the proportion of households for whom a decision has been made on 4,916 1,012 3,904 applications for homeless provision assistance] Living environment (outdoors) [incl. air quality, road traffic 7,963 7,449 514 collisions] Crime [burglary, violence, theft, criminal damage] 15,075 12,959 2,116 Income [recipients of means-tested benefits] 16,127 15,021 1,106 Living environment (indoors) [incl. social & private housing in 16,566 16,319 247 poor condition, houses without central heating] Employment [Jobseekers Allowance and Incapacity Benefits 20,461 18,741 1,720 claimants, New Deal Scheme participants] Barriers to housing and services (geographical) [incl. distance 19,217 18,787 430 from services, e.g. GP surgery, post office] Health and disability [incl. hospital statistics.] 23,767 23,193 573 Education (skills) [proportion of working-age adults with no or 26,684 26,703 + 19 low qualifications] Education (children and young people) [incl. Key Stage scores 23,419 31,350 + 7,931 and staying-on rates] Average rank (out of 32,284) 18,755 14,610 4,145 Where the ranking for 2007 has become smaller this reflects a worsening of the position, i.e. a move towards higher deprivation. The data in Table 6 suggest that, over the last three years, deprivation in Barnet has increased especially, albeit not to a great extent, in terms of more applications for homeless provision, an increase in crime and fewer people being in employment. On the other hand, educational achievements have improved by a relatively large amount. These changes, which affect a number of SOA areas rather than the whole borough, are unlikely to be especially significant in terms of the need for future health and social care services unless there are further changes in the same direction.

×