Is your health worse depending on what job you do? Health Inequalities in Warwickshire, 2011 Census

Health Inequalities InfographicHealth outcomes have been shown to vary markedly between people depending on their socio-economic position based on occupation. Socio-economic position is a good indicator of the general living conditions, access to goods and services, career development prospects, educational attainment, salary range, disposable income, wealth, assets and social standing: Such factors are important drivers of well-being and health.

The infographic presented here looks at  rates of ‘Not Good’ health between groups of people based on their socio-economic class from the 2011 Census. People with different occupations and socio-economic statuses report different levels of health. These differences can be described as the health gap or inequality and can be compared between classes in the same geographical location, between areas and between men and women.

An examination of the rates of ‘Not Good’ health from the 2011 Census show there was a pattern of deteriorating health with increasing disadvantage associated with the socio-economic position of the occupation.

Routine workers in Class 7 had the highest rates of ‘Not Good’ health nationally, regionally and at local authority level for both men and women. Conversely, the most advantaged higher managerial and professional class (Class 1) had the lowest rates of ‘Not Good’ health. Continue reading

Achieving Social Inclusion Across Warwick District

Achieving Social Inclusion across Warwick District

Earlier this year,  a steering group convened by Warwick District Council commissioned the Observatory to produce an index to assess the scale and distribution of social exclusion in Warwick District. This evidence base will support the District and other partner agencies in reviewing their approach to improving social inclusion.

With the need to understand the geographical spread of social exclusion issues, our analysis focuses on spatial data.  However, there was also a recognised need to understand where specific themes may require more attention than others; therefore, the analysis is based upon producing a model that describes social exclusion at a local level whilst also identifying overarching themes that require district-wide attention.

The 53 indicators used in the index were grouped into the following 7 themes:

  • Isolation
  • Health and Wellbeing
  • Children and Young People
  • Income and Labour Market
  • Housing and Homes
  • Crime and Community Safety
  • Communities of Interest

The map and table below show the top ten areas that are most socially excluded across Warwick District according to this bespoke index.

Index of Social ExclusionLillington East in Crown ward is the most socially excluded area on the index. It is the worst performing area for two of the seven themes (Income and Labour Market and Children and Young People) and features in the top ten for five of the seven indicators. This area exhibits a wide range of exclusion related issues rather than a handful of problems which exist elsewhere.

Map of social exclusionOne of the benefits of producing the index at a very local level is areas are identified that may have been previously masked when looking at data at a higher level.  This is the case for the two Sydenham areas (ranked 3rd and 4th on the index) which sit within Willes ward. Sydenham North is the worst performing area in the District for two themes (Health & Wellbeing and Communities of Interest) and both areas have a diverse population in terms of the proportion of residents born abroad and ethnicity.

Half of the areas in the top 10 are in Brunswick ward. Stoneleigh is the first rural area to feature on the index as the 8th most socially excluded area in the District.

For more of the key messages and to access the report, please click on the link below:

Warwick District Social Exclusion Index Report

Warwick District Social Exclusion Index Appendices

The steering group have created a short project feedback survey for the Social Inclusion Index work.  Please could you spare a few minutes to let us have your feedback on the work and how you plan to use it by clicking on the link below:

Warwick-Social-Exclusion-Banner

Crime, Recovery and Treatment

It has been suggested that drug users are more likely than non-users to commit criminal offences.

Research studies have found that acquisitive crime such as stealing is commonly linked to offenders of these crime types testing positive for drug use. Treatment for drug using offenders has been measured using a Value For Money (VFM) tool, which demonstrates that crime falls and health improves when people are in drug treatment.

A report has been produced, focusing on drug related criminal activities across Warwickshire for 2012/13. A link to this report can be found below.

Crime, Recovery & Treatment in Warwickshire 2012-13

Warwickshire Ranks 6th in the Top 10 Places to live in the UK in a new Quality of Life Index from USwitch

USwitch have released a new Quality of Life Index which has rev10-Best-places-to-live-in-the-UK1ealed that Warwickshire ranks 6th in the Top 10 best places to live in the UK.

The study assessed 138 local areas for 24 different factors including salaries, disposable household income and the cost of essential goods, such as fuel, food and energy bills. Lifestyle factors such as working hours, life expectancy and hours of sunshine, were also included to provide a complete picture of the quality of life in each region.

While Solihull comes out on top, the bottom of the index is dominated by Scottish regions with East and North Ayrshire ranked as the worst place to live in the UK, with low income, poor exam results and low life expectancy.

The analysis has sparked some interesting comments on USwitch’s website. See below for the full article:

Quality of Life Index

Quality of Life in Warwickshire 2013/14 report published

Quality of Life

Today the team is publishing our annual Quality of Life in Warwickshire report, which provides a detailed look at the people, places and communities in our county. The report is an assessment of the demographic, social, economic and environmental themes that all play a part in influencing our residents’ quality of life.

The need for this type of material is more important than ever, as increasingly limited resources need to be deployed in transparent, evidence-led ways. The Quality of Life in Warwickshire report continues to provide local decision makers in the public, private, and voluntary sectors with that evidence base so that improving the lives of all of Warwickshire’s residents remains our collective priority.

New in this year’s report is the inclusion of 2011 Census data across a number of the themes, resulting in several new indicators. Our 2011 Census prospectus gives further details of the team’s work in this area.

As in previous reports, we’ve started each section with a ‘data visualisation’, designed to stimulate your interest and make the statistics more engaging. We’ve also continued with the Interactive Maps in this year’s report. This provides users with a tool for viewing and analysing many of the datasets included in the report at a very local level.

To find out more please click on the link below to download the report:

Quality of Life in Warwickshire 2013/14 report (6.8 MB)

Continue reading

The proportion of children in low income families falling in Warwickshire according to the latest data

Late last month, Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HRMC) released the latest 2011 figures showing the numbers and proportions of children in low income families.

The Children in Low-Income Families Local Measure (formerly the Revised Local Child Poverty Measure or National Indicator 116) shows the proportion of children living in families in receipt of out-of-work (means-tested) benefits or in receipt of tax credits where their reported income is less than 60 per cent of UK median income. This measure provides a broad proxy for relative low-income child poverty as set out in the Child Poverty Act 2010, and enables analysis at a local level. Statistics are published at various levels of geography providing an annual snapshot at 31 August from 2006 to 2011.

The figures suggest that there has been a fall in the number of young people living in poverty across the UK and Warwickshire in 2011.

In the UK, the proportion of children living in low-income families slightly decreased from 20.6% to 20.1%, equating to around 52,000 fewer children in low-income families in 2011 compared with 2010.  The vast majority of the decrease came from a 50,000 fall in the number of children in families receiving out-of-work benefits.

The same is true across Warwickshire. In 2011, there was 505 fewer children in low income families (15,315 children) than the previous year, largely due to the reduction in the number of children in families receiving out-of-work benefits.

In a previous blog post, we’ve looked at the relative nature of this definition of child poverty. We saw incomes fall between 2009 and 2010 and as a result, so did the number of children considered to be in poverty as fewer households fell below the income threshold.

However, the latest data shows a rise in the low income threshold, from £211 in 2010 to £218 in 2011 and therefore the fall in the numbers of children in low income families in 2011 cannot be necessarily explained by the relative nature of the child poverty dataset. Fewer children in low income families is largely the result of more families moving into work and are therefore less dependent on state support.

The government recognises the limitations of this measure and has stated that it wants to look at alternative indicators. In June 2012, the work and pensions secretary proposed to deliver a new set of broader, non-income related measures of poverty.  A consultation on how best to measure child poverty was conducted between November 2012 and February 2013. The consultation asked respondents a number of questions that will help the Government design a multi-dimensional measure of poverty.

In July 2013, the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) published estimates of the costs generated by child poverty rates in every local authority in the UK. The estimates work out the total amount of money that is ‘lost’ in local authorities due to child poverty – reflecting the extra costs to social services, cost to housing services and health care, as well as lost earnings and reduced tax receipts. The estimates show that the annual cost of child poverty in Warwickshire is approximately £134 million.

Keep an eye out for a more detailed look at Child Poverty statistics in our 2013/14 Quality of Life report, due to be released at the beginning of November!

2013 Local Health Profiles

2013 Health ProfileThe 2013 version of the local Health Profiles have been published today and can be accessed at www.healthprofiles.info.

As in previous years, the profiles give a snapshot overview of health for each local authority in England.

They draw together information to present a picture of health in each local area in a user-friendly format. They are a valuable tool for local government, health services and partners in helping them to understand community needs, so that they can work to improve people’s health and reduce health inequalities.

Produced by Public Health England, health profiles are available as interactive maps and charts for each local authority in England and include:

  • An ‘at a glance’ summary description of people’s health in the area, which includes information on locally identified priorities.
  • Maps and charts showing how the health of the area compares to the national view and information on health inequalities within the local authority.
  • Charts presenting changes in health inequalities over a 10 year period, compared to rates for England.
  • A ‘spine chart’ health summary showing the difference in health between the area and the regional/England average for 32 indicators within five domains (our communities, children’s and young people’s health, adults’ health and lifestyle, diseases and poor health, and life expectancy and causes of death).