Cranbrook ward profile

Ward Profile – Cranbrook
Census 2001 Statistics
latest data on Cranbrook
and
This area profile provides a summary of some Key Census statistics for a
Redbridge ward with comparative figures for Redbridge.
The profile provides users with up-to-date information on Cranbrook ward.
More information on the statistics of Redbridge can be obtained from the
‘Redbridge i’ website.
Prepared By:
Policy Team
Census output is crown copyright and is
Strategic
Services
reproduced with the permission of the Controller
Room 44 Town Hall
of HMSO. Any organisation wishing to publish or
PO Box 2, High Road
Ilford, Essex IG1 1DD
re-use the data in this profile should first obtain
Email:
permission from the London Borough of
research@redbridge.gov.uk
Redbridge.
1
Cranbrook
Table of Contents
1. Demographic Analysis
3
Population structure and projections
Ethnicity
Religion
• Mosaic Classification of Residents
•
•
•
2. Housing, Health and Social Well-being
11
Long-term limiting illness
Life expectancy
Standard mortality rates
Housing Tenure
• Household composition
•
•
•
•
3. Economic Well-being
16
Indices of Multiple Deprivation
Working age population
Labour market indicators
Qualifications
Household Income
Economic activity
Occupations and hours worked
• Working age benefits
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
4. Community Safety
26
Overall level of offending
Analysis of crime by ward
Redbridge residents’ survey
Community cohesion
• Violent extremism
•
•
•
•
5. Residents’ Perception (BVPI Survey)
•
Analysis of residents’ survey results
6. Education and Leisure
•
•
31
33
Key stage 2 test results
Libraries and museum
7. Definitions and Explanations
35
2
Cranbrook
DEMOGRAPHIC STATISTICS
Cranbrook is located in the south of the Borough with a population of 11,857 in the 2001
census. It is estimated that the population of the ward is 12,367 in 2008, representing an
increase of 4%. Cranbrook is a fairly affluent ward with a high concentration of Black and
Minority Ethnic groups.
About 71% of the working age is economically active and
unemployment is below the Redbridge average. The Mean household income of £39,199 in
Cranbrook is relatively high compared to the other wards in the south.
This comprehensive statistical information has been compiled and analysed to provide us
with a context for understanding the ward and how people live and work in the area.
Table 1:Total population Cranbrook (2001)
Cranbrook (numbers)
Redbridge (numbers)
11,857
238,634
Males
5,809
115,849
Females
6,048
122,785
% of Males
49%
48.5%
% of Females
51%
51.5%
All people
Source: ONS, Census of Population (Table CAS002 - Sex and Marital Status)
Fig 1: Population Projections for Cranbrook
Cranbrook: Population Projections
12,500
12,450
12,446
(Number)
12,400
12,350
12,383
12,367
12,394
12,381
12,350
12,347
12,319
12,300
12,287
12,250
12,200
2007
2008
2009
2011
2013
2015
2017
2019
2021
Source: GLA 2006 Round Ward Projections
•
Based on the GLA projections, Cranbrook’s population is estimated to grow by 5%
between 2001 and 2011. The community has a population density of 48.9 people per
hectare.
3
Cranbrook
•
Cranbrook has a relatively older age profile in comparison to other wards in the south.
About 63% of the population are below the age of 44 years. The mean age in Cranbrook
is 37.2 years. 64% of the population are within the working age bracket and about 71%
of the people within this working age are economically active.
• Residents over the age of 65 years constitute about 14% of the population of the ward.
Wards in the south have a relatively younger age profile compare to the northern part of
the Borough.
Table 2: Age Structure 2001 (KS02)
Year of Age
•
Cranbrook (numbers)
Cranbrook (%)
Redbridge (%)
0-4
730
6.2
6.6%
5-7
417
3.5
4.0%
8-9
299
2.5
2.8%
10 - 14
808
6.8
6.7%
15
146
1.2
1.3%
16 - 17
351
3.0
2.6%
18 - 19
320
2.7
2.3%
20 - 24
948
8.0
6.6%
25 - 29
953
8.0
7.6%
30 - 44
2461
20.8
23.3%
45 - 59
2266
19.1
18.0%
60 - 64
534
4.5
4.1%
65 - 74
810
6.8
7.2%
75 - 84
538
4.5
5.0%
85 - 89
166
1.4
1.2%
90 & over
111
0.9
0.6%
56% of the population are from the Black Minority Ethnic Group. The Asians (particularly
Indians) constitute the largest ethnic group with 44% of the population of Cranbrook.
Whites make up about 44% of the population. Indians and Pakistanis make up about
25% and 14% of the population respectively.
•
Clementswood has the highest population of BME in a Redbridge ward (BME are in the
majority in seven wards in Redbridge). The percentage of BME is likely increase further
mainly because the south records high inflow of migrants.
4
Cranbrook
Table 3: Ranking Proportion of Population in Specific Age Brackets, Census 2001
% of
Ward Wards
% of
16-64 Ward Wards
65+
44 Valentines
43 Church End
42 Goodmayes
41 Seven Kings
8,043
6,842
7,469
8,027
69 Snaresbrook
68 Hainault
68 Monkhams
67 Fullwell
2,212
2,278
1,933
2,036
20
20
20
18
4,387
4,811
40 Roding
40 Cranbrook
7,126
7,833
66 Barkingside
66 Chadwell
1,877
1,700
17
15
22 Church End
22 Clementswood
21 Bridge
21 Chadwell
21 Newbury
21 Cranbrook
21 Fairlop
21 Aldborough
4,016
4,463
4,408
4,250
4,837
4,362
3,763
4,184
40 Bridge
40 Wanstead
39 Newbury
39 Snaresbrook
37 Mayfield
37 Clayhall
36 Aldborough
36 Clementswood
7,352
7,522
8,498
7,048
7,247
7,580
7,406
7,195
66 Wanstead
65 Aldborough
65 Clayhall
65 Fairlop
65 Mayfield
64 Church End
64 Cranbrook
64 Bridge
1,756
1,736
1,771
1,555
1,671
1,370
1,625
1,525
15
15
15
15
15
14
14
14
2,329
2,400
20 Wanstead
20 Mayfield
4,141
3,948
36 Fairlop
35 Monkhams
6,633
6,257
64 Roding
63 Newbury
1,274
1,425
12
11
2,271
2,228
20 Hainault
19 Barkingside
3,859
3,656
34 Loxford
32 Chadwell
8,501
6,864
63 Seven Kings
62 Valentines
1,248
1,148
10
10
32 Fullwell
32 Barkingside
32 Hainault
6,962
6,976
6,760
62 Goodmayes
1,049
62 Clementswood 1,076
59 Loxford
1,238
10
10
9
Wards
0-15
20-44
Loxford
Clementswood
Newbury
Goodmayes
3,846
3,015
3,151
2,476
28 Valentines
27 Goodmayes
24 Loxford
23 Roding
5,140
4,728
5,667
4,441
Chadwell
Seven Kings
2,466
2,635
22 Snaresbrook
22 Seven Kings
Roding
Barkingside
Fairlop
Aldborough
Clayhall
Valentines
Bridge
Mayfield
2,370
2,450
2,232
2,469
2,504
2,452
2,334
2,308
Hainault
Cranbrook
Fullwell
Wanstead
% of
Ward Wards
Church End
1,785
18 Fullwell
3,645
Monkhams
1,676
17 Monkhams
3,144
Snaresbrook
1,594
15 Clayhall
3,737
Source: 2001 Population Census, Office for National Statistics
% of
Ward
Table 4: Ethnic Groups in Cranbrook
Cranbrook (numbers)
Cranbrook (%)
Redbridge (%)
4427
37.3
57.5%
White Irish
270
2.3
2.3%
White Other White
500
4.2
3.7%
5197
43.8
63.5%
Mixed White and Black Caribbean
84
0.7
0.8%
Mixed White and Black African
26
0.2
0.3%
Mixed White and Asian
95
0.8
0.8%
Mixed Other Mixed
73
0.6
0.6%
278
2.3
2.4%
Asian or Asian British Indian
2958
25.0
14.0%
Asian or Asian British Pakistani
1606
13.5
6.2%
Asian or Asian British Bangladeshi
226
1.9
1.8%
Asian or Asian British Other Asian
395
3.3
3.0%
5185
43.7
25.0%
Black or Black British Black Caribbean
653
5.5
3.8%
Black or Black British Black African
344
2.9
3.3%
Black or Black British Other Black
71
0.6
0.5%
1068
9.0
7.6%
Chinese or other ethnic group Chinese
52
0.4
0.8%
Chinese or other ethnic group Other Ethnic Group
78
0.7
0.6%
130
1.1
1.5%
White British
White
Mixed
Asian or Asian British
Black or Black British
Chinese or other
Source: 2001 Census, Crown Copyright
5
Cranbrook
Christians form the largest religious group in this ward. Hindus, Jewish, and Sikh
•
have a fairly similar distribution of 11% in Cranbrook. Muslims account for 20% of
the ward population. Cranbrook has the fourth largest Muslim population in
Redbridge. Muslims are largely concentrated in southern wards like Clementswood
(31.4%), Valentines (26.7%) and Loxford (31.2%). Redbridge has the 6th highest
Muslim population in London.
Table 5: Religion
Cranbrook (numbers)
Cranbrook (%)
Redbridge (%)
Christian
3782
31.9
50.7%
Buddhist
66
0.6
0.4%
Hindu
1355
11.4
7.8%
Jewish
1291
10.9
6.2%
Muslim
2420
20.4
11.9%
Sikh
1274
10.7
5.5%
80
0.7
0.4%
No Religion
687
5.8
9.6%
Religion Not Stated
903
7.6
7.4%
Other Religions
All People
238635
Source: 2001 Census, Crown Copyright
6
Cranbrook
Mosaic classification of residents
The Mosaic classification of our residents is an attempt to analyse residents using
•
demographic data as well as the lifestyle and attitudes of people. The Mosaic
segmentation is a socio-economic classification scheme that uses over 400 data
items from each of the 24 million households in the UK1. Mosaic segmentation
assigns every household and postcode in the UK into one of 61 lifestyle segments.
These lifestyle segments generally share common characteristics in terms of
lifestyle, behaviour, affluence, deprivation, demographics and service needs.
•
The Mosaic segments enable the Council to gain a deeper insight of residents’
needs and helps to target scarce resources to deliver efficient services in our local
communities. The main limitation of these segments is that some people living in
the postcode areas do not fit the description of the 61 different Mosaic Lifestyle
Segments2. The 61 Segments are grouped into 11 Mosiac Groups as presented in
Fig 2a.
•
Using the Mosaic lifestyle types to analyse the Redbridge population, we find that
about half of the population falls into the Suburban Comfort group. Fig 2 depicts
the distribution of Redbridge’s population based on the Mosaic Lifestyle
segments. Fig 2b also shows the representation of the various Mosaic types at the
ward level.
Fig. 2a: Distribution of Mosaic Groups
Symbols of Success
Redbridge: Mosaic Groups
Happy Families
1.7%
0.4%
4.2%
5.0%
9.9%
2.0%
2.7%
Suburban Comfort
Ties of Community
7.5%
Urban Intelligence
Welfare Borderline
15.2%
51.4%
Municipal Dependency
Blue Collar Enterprise
Twilight Subsistence
Source: Experian 2007
1
The data used in compiling Mosiac is from the 2001 Census (about 54% of the data source) and the rest from
sources such as the electoral roll, shareholder and directors’ list, house prices data, local levels of Council Tax
and lifestyle surveys and health indicators amongst others.
2
Refer to appendix for a detailed description of the Mosaic lifestyle types.
7
Cranbrook
Mosaic Group Description
Redbridge
Population
Symbols of Success contains people whose lives are ‘successful’ by
9.9%
whatever yardsticks society commonly uses to measure success.
These are people who have rewarding careers rather than jobs,
who live in sought after locations, who drive the more modern and
expensive cars and who indulge in the most exotic leisure pursuits.
Most, though not all, appear to enjoy stable household
arrangements.
Happy Families contains people whose focus is on career, home
2.7%
and family. These are mostly younger age groups who are married,
or at least in a permanent relationship, and are now raising
children in post war family houses, often in areas of the country
with rapidly growing populations. The focus of expenditure is on
equipment for the home and garden, and the immediate family
unit is the principal focus of leisure activities.
Suburban Comfort comprises people who have successfully
51.4%
established themselves and their families in comfortable homes in
mature suburbs. Children are becoming more independent, work
is becoming less of a challenge and interest payments on homes
and other loans are becoming less burdensome. With more time
and money on their hands, people can relax and focus on activities
that they find intrinsically rewarding.
Mosaic Group Mosaic Group Description
Symbols of
success
Happy
families
Suburban
comfort
Ties of
community
Urban
intelligence
Welfare
borderline
Municipal
dependency
Blue collar
enterprise
Ties of Community is comprised of people whose lives are mostly
played out within the confines of close knit communities. Living
mostly in older houses in inner city neighbourhoods or in small
industrial towns, most of these people own their homes, drive their
own cars and hold down responsible jobs. Community norms
rather than individual material ambitions shape the pattern of
most residents’ consumption.
Urban Intelligence mostly contains young and well-educated
people who are open to new ideas and influences. Young and
single, and few encumbered with children, these people tend to
be avid explorers of new ideas and fashions, cosmopolitan in their
tastes and liberal in their social attitudes. Whilst eager consumers
of the media and with a sophisticated understanding of brand
values, they like to be treated as individuals, and value authenticity
over veneer.
Welfare Borderline is comprised of many people who are
struggling to achieve the material and personal rewards that are
assumed to be open to all in an affluent society. Few hold down
rewarding or well paying jobs and, as a result, most rely on the
council for their accommodation, on public transport to get
around and on state benefits to fund even the bare essentials. The
lack of stability in many family formations undermines social
networks and leads to high levels of anti social behaviour among
local children.
Municipal Dependency mostly contains families on lower incomes
who live on large municipal council estates where few of the
tenants have exercised their right to buy. Often isolated in the
outer suburbs of large provincial cities, Municipal Dependency is
characterised as much by low aspirations as by low incomes. Here
people watch a lot of television and buy trusted mainstream
brands from shops that focus on price rather than range or service.
Blue Collar Enterprise comprises people who, though not
necessarily very well educated, are practical and enterprising in
their orientation. Many of these people live in what were once
council estates but where tenants have exercised their right to
buy. They own their cars, provide a reliable source of labour to
local employers and are streetwise consumers. Tastes are mass
market rather than individualistic and focus on providing comfort
and value to family members.
8
London
Population
14.4%
3.2%
18.1%
15.2%
16.1%
7.5%
23.8%
2.0%
14.3%
0.4%
0.8%
4.2%
5.5%
Cranbrook
Twilight Subsistence consists of elderly people who are mostly
reliant on state benefits, and live in housing designed by local
Twilight
authorities and housing associations. Some live in old people’s
subsistence
homes or sheltered accommodation, while others live in small
bungalows, set in small enclaves within larger council estates. Most
of these people spend money only on the basic necessities of life.
Grey Perspectives consists mostly of pensioners who own their
homes and who have some source of income beyond the basic
Grey
state pension. Many of these people have, on retirement, moved to
perspectives
the seaside or the countryside to live among people similar to
themselves. Today many of these people have quite active
lifestyles and are considered in their purchasing decisions.
Rural Isolation contains people whose pattern of living is
distinctively rural. They live not just outside major population
centres but also deep in the countryside, in small communities
which have been little influenced by the influx of urban
Rural isolation commuters. These are places where people with different levels of
income share attachments to local communities, and where
engagement with the community and with the natural
environment are more important to most residents than material
consumption.
Source: Experian 2007
Fig 2b: Map showing the widespread nature
Source: Experian 2007
9
1.7%
1.3%
5.0%
2.5%
0.0%
0.0%
Cranbrook
•
The maps below show the concentration of specific Mosaic Lifestyle types in
Redbridge wards. About 56% of households in Cranbrook fall within the Suburban
Comfort group. The dominant profile type in this ward is the Asian Enterprise.
Asian Enterprise profile types are described as well-qualified minorities, mostly
from Asia, who have settled in suburban semi-detached houses in inter war
suburbs. (Map C, D & B).
Map A
Map B
Map C
Map D
Map E
Source: Experian 2007
10
Cranbrook
Housing, Health and Social Well-being
Health
•
People with a limiting long-term illness make up about 17% of the population of
the ward. Hainault has the highest percentage of 23%, which is much higher than
the Redbridge average of 16.3%. Self–assessed health status is a good way to
describe the health of a population and there is evidence that people’s own
assessment of their health is a fairly reliable indicator of their health status.
•
On average females in Redbridge have a higher life expectancy (81.5 years -2002-06
average) than males (77.4 years - 2002-06 average). The gap between male and
female life expectancy has narrowed given the rise in both male and female figures
since 1998-2000. Life expectancy shows the number of years a baby would be
expected to live if he or she experiences current mortality rates throughout his/her
lifetime.
•
Life expectancy for males in Cranbrook is 77.7 years and 82.1 years for females. The
gap between the male life expectancy in Clayhall and Cranbrook is 4 years. Our
analysis shows that life expectancy is relatively low in income-deprived areas.
•
The standard mortality ratio for ‘all causes’ (SMR) of 93.5 indicates that the ward has
lower than average mortality compared to England. The ward-level SMR is a
measure of how more or less likely a person living in that ward is to die compared
to the standard population, in this case England. Majority of the wards with high
SMR for ‘all causes’ are located in the south of the Borough. Cranbrook has the
lowest SMR for cancer in Redbridge. The ward has a higher than average rate for
coronary heart disease for all ages.
Table 6: Long-term limiting illness (KS08)
Cranbrook Ward
Cranbrook (%)
Redbridge (%)
People with a limiting long-term illness
People of working age with a limiting longterm illness
2023
17.1
16.3
992
13.1
12.2
General health: Good
8152
68.8
69.76
General health: Fairly good
General health: Not good
2687
1019
22.7
8.6
21.85
8.39
Source: ONS Census 2001
11
Cranbrook
Table 7: Standardised Mortality Ratio (SMR) form All Causes, Cancer and Coronary
Heart Disease (2001-2005)
Ward
Loxford
SMR,
All Causes,
All ages
133.4
Aldborough
Seven Kings
Clementswood
Chadwell
Valentines
Snaresbrook
Mayfield
Goodmayes
Cranbrook
118.6
110.5
107.2
106.5
103.9
101.9
99.4
96.5
93.5
Fullwell
Monkhams
Hainault
Roding
Bridge
Fairlop
Wanstead
Church End
Newbury
Barkingside
Clayhall
93.1
92.6
91.7
91.4
90.3
88.0
87.7
86.1
85.1
75.7
73.3
Ward
Seven Kings
Ward
SMR
Cancer,
All ages
113
Hainault
Clementswood
Church End
Bridge
Aldborough
Wanstead
Chadwell
Roding
Snaresbrook
105
102
101
101
100
99
99
98
97
Fairlop
Mayfield
Barkingside
Loxford
Clayhall
Valentines
Monkhams
Fullwell
Newbury
Goodmayes
Cranbrook
93
92
92
91
88
88
87
86
83
81
75
SMR Coronary
Heart Disease
All ages
Loxford
137
Aldborough
Valentines
Cranbrook
Clementswood
Goodmayes
Roding
Bridge
Newbury
Fairlop
131
125
121
120
119
113
110
110
109
Snaresbrook
Seven Kings
Monkhams
Fullwell
Hainault
Chadwell
Wanstead
Mayfield
Church End
Barkingside
Clayhall
100
98
96
92
91
90
89
84
82
82
82
Source: London Health Observatory
Table 8: Life Expectancy at birth (2002 – 2006)
Fig 3
Ward
Aldborough
Barkingside
Bridge
Chadwell
Church End
Clayhall
Clementswood
Cranbrook
Fairlop
Fullwell
Goodmayes
Hainault
Loxford
Mayfield
Monkhams
Newbury
Roding
Seven Kings
Snaresbrook
Valentines
Wanstead
Male Female
76.5
79.5
79.3
77.0
77.0
78.9
81.7
75.1
77.7
78.3
76.5
85.0
82.0
80.3
83.2
82.6
79.4
82.1
82.0
82.0
Clementswood
81.8
81.2
78.2
80.3
81.2
82.1
82.3
80.5
81.5
83.7
81.4
Fairlop
77.1
77.4
73.0
77.8
80.2
77.3
77.9
77.2
75.7
75.2
79.8
Loxford
Life Expectancy Redbridge
(2002-2006)
Aldborough
Chadwell
Mayfield
Seven Kings
Hainault
Monkhams
Wanstead
Snaresbrook
Goodmayes
Fullwell
males
Bridge
females
Newbury
Cranbrook
Roding
Clayhall
Church End
Valentines
Barkingside
72.0
73.0
74.0
75.0
76.0
77.0
78.0
79.0
Years
Source: London Health Observatory
12
80.0
81.0
82.0
83.0
84.0
85.0
86.0
Cranbrook
Housing
•
Owner-occupied households make up about 77% of the total stock of housing in
Cranbrook compared to the Redbridge average of 75%. Properties rented from the
Council constitute about 3% of the housing stock.
•
Quantitative research from the BVPI General Survey 2007 identified concerns
relating to housing. Redbridge residents were of the opinion that housing was in
short supply and overpriced. Others think that there is a need for more affordable
housing to address the perceived problem of long housing waiting lists.
Table 9: Cranbrook Household Tenure (KS18)
Cranbrook (numbers) Cranbrook (%) Redbridge (%)
All Households
4094
Owner occupied: Owns outright
1285
31.4
30.27
Owner occupied: Owns with a mortgage or loan
1870
45.7
44.5
14
0.3
0.52
Rented from: Council (local authority)
Rented from: Housing Association / Registered Social
Landlord
109
2.7
6.74
134
3.3
3.4
Rented from: Private landlord or letting agency
588
14.4
12.06
94
2.3
2.51
Owner occupied: Shared ownership
Rented from: Other
Source: ONS Census 2001
Household type breakdown (2001 - 2007) - Redbridge
Source: Land Registry
13
92288
Cranbrook
Table 10: Household Composition (KS20)
Cranbrook
(numbers) Cranbrook (%)
Redbridge
(%)
One person: Pensioner (Households)1
517
12.63
13.42
One person: Other (Households)1
566
13.83
15.68
299
7.3
7.5
370
9.04
9.56
858
20.96
20.31
357
8.72
7.1
107
2.61
3.91
73
1.78
2.14
13
0.32
0.28
172
4.2
6.55
162
3.96
3.84
321
7.84
4.24
4
0.1
0.17
14
0.34
0.39
261
6.38
4.92
1
One family and no others: All pensioners (Households)
One family and no others: Married couple households: No children
(Households)1
One family and no others: Married couple households: With
dependent children (Households)1
One family and no others: Married couple households: All children
non-dependent (Households)1
One family and no others: Cohabiting couple households: No
children (Households)1
One family and no others: Cohabiting couple households: With
dependent children (Households)1
One family and no others: Cohabiting couple households: All
children non-dependent (Households)1
One family and no others: Lone parent households: With
dependent children (Households)1
One family and no others: Lone parent households: All children
non-dependent (Households)1
Other households: With dependent children (Households)1
Other households: All student (Households)1
1
Other households: All pensioner (Households)
Other households: Other (Households)
1
1
All Households (Households)
4094
Source: ONS Census 2001
14
92,288
Cranbrook
Economic well-being and deprivation
•
The Index of Multiple Deprivation measures multiple deprivation at small area level
known as Lower-layer Super Output Areas (LSOA). A LSOA is an area that contains
approximately 1500 people. There are 159 LSOAs in Redbridge. The Index is based on
the principle that distinct indicators of deprivation can be combined to generate an
overall score of deprivation.
•
The Index combines a range of economic, social and housing indicators. These
indicators measure the number of households on low income, unemployment, forced
exclusion from work, health status, barriers to housing and key services amongst
others. These indicators combine into a single deprivation score and used to rank each
small areas according to their relative level of deprivation.
•
Cranbrook is a relatively affluent ward in comparison to the wards in the south of the
Borough. Just about 3 of its LSOAs fall within the 20% most deprived areas in England
under the Crime & Disorder and Living Environment domains.
Table 11: Indices of Deprivation: Ward Level Ranking in Redbridge
Redbridge
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Ward
Clementswood
Loxford
Hainault
Valentines
Goodmayes
Seven Kings
Newbury
Fullwell
Mayfield
Aldborough
Roding
Cranbrook
Chadwell
Fairlop
Bridge
Wanstead
Snaresbrook
Barkingside
Church End
Clayhall
Monkhams
Average IMD Score
2007
30.86
30.15
29.09
27.86
24.32
24.05
21.43
20.49
19.78
19.69
19.30
18.24
17.62
17.22
17.20
16.00
15.24
15.17
13.72
13.28
9.36
Ward
Loxford
Clementswood
Hainault
Valentines
Seven Kings
Goodmayes
Newbury
Roding
Fullwell
Aldborough
Fairlop
Mayfield
Cranbrook
Snaresbrook
Wanstead
Bridge
Chadwell
Barkingside
Church End
Clayhall
Monkhams
Average IMD Score
2004
27.88
Worst
27.81
25.57
25.3
21.41
20.37
18.41
17.6
17.52
17.09
16.43
16.05
15.68
15.39
15.02
14.46
13.39
12.69
11.99
10.8
8.32
Best
National Average = England Average") Source: DCLG; Index of Multiple Deprivation 2004 &2007 (1=most deprived,
7932=least deprived).
15
Cranbrook
•
Supplementary Indices measuring income deprivation amongst children and older
people (the Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI) and the Income
Deprivation Affecting Older People Index (IDAOPI)) shows that 1 out of the 8 LSOAs
in the ward fall in the most deprived 20% category under these measures.
Table 12: Number of LSOA’s in the most deprived 20% in England under all the
Domains
Aldborough
Barkingside
Bridge
Chadwell
Church End
Clayhall
Clementswood
Cranbrook
Fairlop
Fullwell
Goodmayes
Hainault
Loxford
Mayfield
Monkhams
Newbury
Roding
Seven Kings
Snaresbrook
Valentines
Wanstead
Total
Barriers
Health
to
Area
Multiple
Deprivatio Education, Housing Crime Living
Commi Number deprivatio
Skills and and
and
Enviro
Emplo n and
ttee
of SOA's n measure Income yment Disability Training Services Disorder nment
4
8
2
2
4
8
2
2
7
1
1
5
7
1
2
7
2
2
4
8
3
1
6
7
3
7
1
3
3
7
8
1
2
3
7
1
3
8
1
2
2
1
5
7
2
4
2
3
8
1
6
4
1
1
1
6
9
2
9
1
1
2
1
4
6
7
1
1
2
7
1
1
1
7
8
1
2
2
1
1
7
1
1
1
4
1
2
5
8
2
4
2
2
3
1
7
1
1
1
1
2
7
8
2
4
2
1
2
5
1
8
1
4
1
159
13
40
10
5
1
21
30
28
Source: CLG
16
IDA IDA
CI OPI
1
1
1
2
1
6
6
1
2
2
6
7
1
1
4
1
7
2
1
4
1
5
1
40
1
1
1
1
5
1
34
Cranbrook
Fig 4: 2007 Index of Multiple Deprivation 2007 - Redbridge
Sources: CLG
Table 13: Working age population (2001)
Cranbrook (numbers)
Cranbrook (%)
Redbridge (%)
All people - working age
7,573
63.9
62.5
Males - working age
3,946
67.9
65.5
60
59.7
Females - working age
3,627
Source: Census 2001. Note: Percentages are based on total population.
•
About 36% of the population of females within the working age group are
economically inactive as compared to the Redbridge average of 34%.
•
Cranbrook has an employment rate of 59%, the highest being Snaresbrook with 66%.
There are marked differences in employment rates within the wards in Redbridge. The
difference between the highest and lowest working age employment rates at the ward
level is 18.1 percentage points. The employment rate in Redbridge is 67%.
•
The low employment rates in areas where there is high concentration of BME may be
due to the fact that employment rate for BME groups are relatively lower than the
white ethnic group.
The key challenge now is to continue to steer a course of
increasing economic activity in areas where employment rates are very low.
17
Cranbrook
Table 14: Selection of Labour Market Indicators
Employment density Economic activity Unemployment rate Employment rate
Ward
(Jobs sq/km) 2006
(res) (%) 2001
(%) 'September 2008 (res) (%) 2001
Aldborough
440.35
67.3
2.7
61.06
Barkingside
1661.36
65.89
2
59.99
Bridge
691.03
70.49
2
65.79
Chadwell
1271.15
70.05
3
64.64
Church End
2475.82
70.44
1.4
64.6
Clayhall
1408.19
66.54
2.1
61.01
Clementswood
7525.51
57.33
4.9
48.02
Cranbrook
975.83
64.58
2.2
57.84
Fairlop
830.78
68.22
2.4
62.6
Fullwell
731.95
64.6
2.8
59.04
Goodmayes
680.58
67.16
3.8
58.85
Hainault
559.35
62.68
3.2
57.49
Loxford
3120.45
59.38
4.3
49.62
Mayfield
561.49
64.22
3.2
57.78
Monkhams
910.19
68.11
1.2
64.28
Newbury
1894.65
64.45
3.3
56.99
Roding
728.53
70.97
2.3
65.42
Seven Kings
2839.54
63.73
3.4
55.78
Snaresbrook
1420.1
70.82
1.6
66.07
Valentines
3801.72
63.46
4.6
54.67
Wanstead
176.17
70.45
1.8
65.32
Source: ONS
•
Majority of the working age population (72%) have lower or higher level
qualifications, which is above the Redbridge average of 68.8%. The occupation of
people within the working age are mostly in administration & secretarial,
professional, technical and managerial.
Table 15: Qualification (2001)
Cranbrook (numbers)
Cranbrook (%)
Redbridge (%)
All people
No qualifications or level unknown
2,381
27.5
31.2
Lower level qualifications
3,688
42.7
45.0
Higher level qualifications
2,576
29.8
23.8
937
18.8
21.9
Lower level qualifications
2,147
43
47.6
Higher level qualifications
1,913
38.3
30.5
78
24.4
30.5
Lower level qualifications
168
52.5
50.0
Higher level qualifications
74
23.1
19.4
In employment
No qualifications or level unknown
Unemployed
No qualifications or level unknown
Source: Census of Population (Table CAS032 - Sex and Age and Level of Qualifications by EA)
Note: All figures are for persons aged 16 to 74.
18
Cranbrook
Household Income 2007
•
22% of the households in Cranbrook earn less than £20,000. About 61% of
households in the ward earn less than £40,000.
•
The mean household income in Cranbrook is £39,199.
•
Loxford, Clementswood and Hainualt are the only wards where the mean
household income is less than £35,000.
•
About 230 households earn less than £10,000.
Income
% below £20K
No. of Household
% £20K - £40K
915
% £40K - 60K
1,629
% above £60K
951
698
Source: Paycheck 2007, CACI
Fig 5: Household Income in Cranbrook
Income
Household Income: Cranbrook
117
29
36
45
57
72
90
112
140
173
213
258
£100k+
£95k-£99,999
£90k-£94,999
£85k-£89,999
£80k-£84,999
£75k-£79,999
£70k-£74,999
£65k-£69,999
£60k-£64,999
£55k-£59,999
£50k-£54,999
£45k-£49,999
£40k-£44,999
£35k-£39,999
£30k-£34,999
£25k-£29,999
£20k-£24,999
£15k-£19,999
£10k-£14,999
£5k-£9,999
£0-£4,999
307
358
404
434
434
390
295
167
63
0
100
200
300
No. of Households
Source: Paycheck 2007, CACI
19
400
500
Cranbrook
Fig 6: Household Income for Redbridge 2007
Mean Household Income - Redbridge 2007
31,805
33,014
33,367
35,336
35,866
35,898
36,659
36,943
37,660
38,042
38,567
38,827
39,199
39,260
39,436
39,684
40,936
41,632
43,343
44,261
45,553
Clementswood
Loxford
Hainault
Mayfield
Fullwell
Valentines
Goodmayes
Seven Kings
Aldborough
Newbury
Fairlop
Chadwell
Cranbrook
Barkingside
Roding
Bridge
Clayhall
Snaresbrook
Wanstead
Monkhams
Church End
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
50,000
Mean Income
Source: Paycheck 2007, CACI
Table 16: Economically active (2001)
Cranbrook (numbers)
Cranbrook (%)
Redbridge (%)
All People
Economically active
5,397
71.3
73.8
In employment
5,034
66.5
69.0
Employees
4,205
55.5
58.7
Self employed
829
10.9
10.4
Unemployed
363
6.7
6.4
Economically active
3,084
78.2
81.1
In employment
2,866
72.6
75.3
Employees
2,199
55.7
58.8
Self employed
667
16.9
16.5
Unemployed
218
7.1
7.2
Economically active
2,313
63.8
66.3
Employment
2,168
59.8
62.6
Employees
2,006
55.3
58.6
Self employed
162
4.5
4.1
Unemployed
145
6.3
5.5
Males
Females
Source: Census 2001. Note: Percentages are based on working age population
20
Cranbrook
Table 17: Economically inactive (2001)
Cranbrook (numbers)
Cranbrook (%)
Redbridge (%)
All People
Economically inactive
2,176
28.7
26.2
Retired
158
2.1
1.9
Student
711
9.4
7.4
1,307
17.3
17.0
Economically inactive
861
21.8
18.9
Retired
112
2.8
2.6
Student
371
9.4
7.3
Other
378
9.6
8.9
1,315
36.2
33.7
Retired
46
1.3
1.1
Student
340
9.4
7.4
Other
929
25.6
25.3
Other
Males
Females
Economically inactive
Source: Census 2001. Note: Percentages are based on working age population.
Table 18: Hours Worked (2001)
Cranbrook (numbers)
Cranbrook (%)
Redbridge (%)
All People
Full time in employment
4,008
79.6
79.5
Part time in employment
1,025
20.4
20.5
Full time in employment
2,549
88.9
90.0
Part time in employment
319
11.1
10.0
Full time in employment
1,459
67.4
66.4
Part time in employment
706
32.6
33.6
Males
Females
Source: Census of Population (Table CAS029 - Sex and Age by Hours Worked)
Note: Figures are for working age and percentages are based on all persons in employment.
Table 19: Employment by occupation (2001)
Cranbrook (numbers)
Cranbrook (%)
Redbridge (%)
1 Managers and senior officials
875
17.4
16.3
2 Professional
917
18.2
14.2
3 Associate professional & technical
720
14.3
15.6
4 Administrative & secretarial
967
19.2
18.6
5 Skilled trades
300
6
8.3
6 Personal services
217
4.3
5.5
7 Sales and customer services
389
7.7
7.5
8 Process plant and machine operatives
300
6
6.2
9 Elementary occupations
349
6.9
7.9
Source: Census of Population (Table CAS033 - Sex and Occupation by Age)
Note: Figures are for working age by Soc 2000 major groups. Percentages are based on all persons in employment.
21
Cranbrook
Working-age benefits
The Jobseeker's Allowance (JSA) is payable to people under pensionable age who are
available for, and actively seeking, work.
The number of Jobseekers Allowance claimants as a proportion of the resident working
age people was 2.2% (September 2008). The duration of most of the claims are up to 6
months. In February 2008, the number of benefit claimants as a proportion of resident
working-age people was 12%. Jobseekers, Incapacity benefits and Lone parents constitute
the majority of claims in the ward.
Table 20: Total JSA claimants (September 2008)
Cranbrook (numbers)
Cranbrook (%)
All people
175
Males
Females
Redbridge (%)
2.2
2.9
122
2.9
3.6
53
1.5
2
Source: claimant count with rates and proportions. Note: The percentage figures show the number of JSA
claimants as a proportion of resident working-age people.
Table 21: JSA claimants by age and duration (September 2008)
Cranbrook (numbers)
Cranbrook (%)
Redbridge (%)
By age of claimant
Aged 18-24
45
25.7
29.7
Aged 25-49
100
58.3
53.6
30
16
16.5
130
75.4
73.1
Over 6 up to 12 months
30
18.3
17.6
Over 12 months
10
6.3
9.3
Aged 50 and over
By duration of claim
Up to 6 months
Source: claimant count - age and duration. Note: The figures represent the number of JSA
claimants in a particular category as a percentage of all JSA claimants.
Table 22: DWP benefit claimants (February 2008)
Cranbrook (numbers)
Cranbrook (%)
Redbridge (%)
Total claimants
910
11.7
13.2
Job seekers
165
2.1
2.2
Incapacity benefits
400
5.1
5.5
Lone parents
130
1.7
2.8
Carers
85
1.1
1
Others on income related benefits
45
0.6
0.5
Disabled
55
0.7
0.8
Bereaved
30
0.4
0.3
Source: benefit claimants - working age clients for small areas. Note: The percentage figures show the
number of benefit claimants as a proportion of resident working-age people.
22
Cranbrook
Community Safety and Cohesion
•
In the 2007 Best Value Performance Indicator (BVPI) survey, 68% of respondents
stated that feeling and being safe from anti-social behaviour was the most
important issue to them in making Redbridge a good place to live.
42% of
respondents felt that improving the level of crime was the number one priority for
Redbridge.
Overall level of offending in Redbridge.
•
The crime level in Redbridge is falling. When monitoring the reduction of the
recommended basket of ten British Crime Survey crimes, Redbridge achieved the
4th best reduction in London. Fig 7 shows the reductions in crime levels between
October 2006 – September 2007 and the same time period in 2005/06.
Fig 7
23
Cranbrook
Analysis of crime by ward
•
As shown in Fig 8 wards in the south recorded the highest crime levels in
Redbridge. High crime areas are shaded yellow and areas shaded in light blue
signify the lowest crime rates in the borough.
•
In the Crime and Disorder Survey 2007, 44.6% of respondents stated that crime
levels in Redbridge are about average. The survey showed that residents wanted
the following crimes types to be given highest priority in the crime reduction
strategy: Gun and knife crime, robbery and street crime, assault, residential
burglary, racist crime and drugs & alcohol.
Fig 8: Crime Level in Wards
Fig 9: Borough level Breakdown
Crime breakdown for financial year 2006/07
Criminal Damage
11%
Other Notifiable
Offences
Drugs
1%
5%
Violence Against the
Person
18%
Sexual Offences
1%
Fraud or Forgery
9%
Robbery
5%
Burglary
12%
Other theft and
handling
19%
24
Vehicle crime
19%
Cranbrook
Redbridge Residents’ Survey 2007
•
From the BVPI General Residents’ survey, residents in Clementwwood, Loxford and
Mayfield (Area 6) tend to mention anti-social behaviour as being a greater problem
in these areas (73% cite this problem).
•
The BVPI General Residents’ survey also shows that over half of Redbridge residents
don’t feel safe outdoors in their local area after dark. The fear of being outdoors
after dark is greatest in Clementswood, Loxford and Mayfield (70% not safe). This
figure is lowest in Bridge, Church End, Roding and Monkhams (33%). Form our
analysis there appears to be a strong correlation between the most deprived areas
in Redbridge and the fear of crime.
Table 23: Crime Statistics for Redbridge Wards (Sept-Aug 05/06 – Sept-Aug 06/07)
Residential
Burglary
WARD
Sept Aug
05/06
Street Crime
Theft Of
Vehicle
Theft From
Vehicle
Criminal
Damage
Sept - Sept - Sept - Sept - Sept - Sept - Sept - Sept - Sept Aug
Aug
Aug
Aug
Aug
Aug
Aug
Aug
Aug
06/07 05/06 06/07 05/06 06/07 05/06 06/07 05/06 06/07
ABH+GBH+
Common Assault
Sept Aug
05/06
Sept Aug
06/07
Aldborough
107
93
60
42
69
71
155
107
197
225
131
106
Barkingside
95
77
38
42
40
29
105
111
135
130
70
69
Bridge
75
87
64
21
53
57
100
80
130
117
81
83
Chadwell
58
67
39
33
58
56
91
102
167
151
115
114
Church End
80
89
87
47
62
33
173
121
132
139
76
60
Clayhall
156
126
60
37
55
46
149
104
139
148
78
72
Clementswood
60
69
136
170
96
94
192
223
452
518
345
359
Cranbrook
157
118
72
63
74
61
155
113
136
148
104
72
Fairlop
77
75
61
41
72
74
126
96
233
210
155
138
Fullwell
128
136
63
39
52
40
103
60
214
201
130
115
Goodmayes
118
67
85
77
104
85
159
119
201
203
146
136
Hainault
95
92
34
36
73
80
105
77
267
238
179
135
Loxford
120
176
92
84
127
103
190
179
286
283
277
245
Mayfield
66
104
64
69
58
58
131
136
144
119
95
99
Monkhams
76
61
50
36
44
34
129
103
82
79
46
53
Newbury
93
94
63
43
94
85
158
114
178
194
110
140
Roding
93
93
48
30
73
52
115
100
149
131
105
74
Seven Kings
100
52
86
70
89
81
178
149
247
255
211
186
Snaresbrook
145
88
81
69
52
38
157
130
152
159
84
63
Valentines
126
115
118
103
89
49
161
182
296
333
220
222
Wanstead
153
150
69
73
56
52
179
168
188
141
77
50
Total Redbridge
2178
2029
1470
1225
1490
1278
3011
2574
4125
4122
2835
2591
Source: Redbridge Community Safety
25
Cranbrook
Community Cohesion
•
A Home Office paper, Building Cohesive Communities: A Report of the Ministerial
Group on Public Order and Community Cohesion, identified the following key
issues that can affect community cohesion in our neighbourhoods:
1. The lack of a strong civic identity or shared social values to unite diverse
communities;
2. The fragmentation and polarisation of communities – on economic,
geographical, racial and Cultural lines – on a scale which amounts to
segregation, albeit to an extent by choice;
3. Disengagement of young people from the local decision making process, intergenerational tensions, and an increasingly territorial mentality in asserting
different racial, cultural and religious identities in response to real or perceived
attacks;
4. Weak political and community leadership;
5. Inadequate provision of youth facilities and services;
6. High levels of unemployment, particularly amongst young people;
7. Activities of extremist groups;
8. Weaknesses and disparity in the police response to community issues,
particularly racial incidents; and
9. Irresponsible coverage of race stories by sections of the local media.
•
Since Redbridge is amongst the most diverse boroughs in London, the Council
takes the issues raised above seriously. Hate crime incidents have decreased 18% in
Redbridge between 2005/06 and 2006/07. The prevailing hotspots for racist crime
is in Ilford, however there are other hotspots such as the Barkingside High Street
and Fullwell ward in the north.
Sense of community/community cohesion: BVPI General residents’ survey 2007
•
In Snaresbrook and Wanstead (Area 1) 66% of residents felt that there is a strong
sense of community compared to the Redbridge average (45%). Additionally
residents in Area 1 are more positive about community cohesion (83%) say that
people from different backgrounds get on well.
Residents in Clementswood,
Loxford & Mayfield (50%) and Chadwell, Goodmayes & Seven Kings (56%) are less
26
Cranbrook
positive about community cohesion in their areas.
On the whole diverse
communities maintain a relatively positive relationship in the Borough. Almost two
thirds (64%) believe different people from various backgrounds get on well
together in their local area, compared with fewer than a third who disagree (32%)
Violent extremism
•
Tackling violent extremism is high on the Governments’ agenda. Two National
Indicators have the objective of tackling violent extremism in the country:
1. Protection against terrorist attacks and building resilience to violent
extremism; and
2. Reduce the risk to UK and its interests overseas from international terrorism
•
It is therefore important that Redbridge, as an ethnically diverse borough have
policies and initiatives in place to target terrorism at a local level. The Redbridge
Safer Communities Partnership is tackling this issue through detailed research,
improving community cohesion and involving disaffected youths through
mentoring schemes.
27
Cranbrook
Residents’ Perceptions
(Best Value Performance Indicator General Residents Survey)
Redbridge as a place to live (Aspects of Quality of life)
This highlights residents’ perceptions at the time of conducting the BVPI General survey in
September and October 2007.
Most important in making somewhere a good place to live
Top five Priorities for Residents:
•
Over two-thirds (68%) of Redbridge residents surveyed identified, feeling and being
safe from anti-social behaviour as the most important factor in making somewhere
a good place to live. The top five priorities are:
•
1. Feeling safe and being safe from anti-social behaviour
(68%)
2. Clean streets and better local environment
(57%)
3. The level of crime
(50%)
4. Good schools
(36%)
5. Parks and open spaces
(34%)
Although these priorities are relatively similar in most areas, some notable
variations in the priorities were identified. Residents in Cranbrook, Newbury and
Valentines (Area 7) identified access to school places as an important priority (44%
compared to the 29% Redbridge average).
•
Clementswood, Loxford and Mayfield (Area 6) place greater emphasis on the
importance of health promotion services (38% compared to the 26% Redbridge
average). The emphasis on health promotion for residents in Area 6 may be due to
the relatively poor health status, high mortality rates and low life expectancy in
these wards.
28
Cranbrook
Most in need of improvement in Redbridge
Top five Priorities for Residents:
•
The following are residents’ top priority for things that they think most need
improving:
1. Feeling safe and being safe from anti-social behaviour
(43%)
2. The level of crime
(42%)
3. Clean streets and better local environment
(40%)
4. Activities for teenagers
(33%)
5. The level of Traffic Congestion
(32%)
Although these priorities are relatively similar in most areas, there are some differences in
certain areas.
•
In Cranbrook, Newbury and Valentines (Area 7) Clean streets and better local
environment was considered as the most important thing that needs improving
(57% cite this vs. 51% who mention anti-social behaviour).
•
In Clementswood, Loxford and Mayfield (Area 6) 50% of residents cite the level of
crime as against 43% who mention anti-social behaviour as the most important
thing that needs improving.
•
Snaresbrook and Wantead (Area 1) cited the level of crime as a priority that needs
improving (39% cite this vs. 36% who mention anti-social behaviour).
•
Bridge, Church End, Monkhams and Roding (Area 2) consider the level of traffic
congestion as the most in need of improvement compared to 34% who cite antisocial behaviour.
29
Cranbrook
Education and Leisure
Schools
Primary school (Key Stage 2) Performance - 2007
Key Stage 2 tests are taken at the end of the Key Stage 2 programme of study normally in
Year 6 when children are 11 years old. The table below shows the performance of
Cranbrook. The subjects covered are English, mathematics and science.
Total
Pupils
English
Mathematics
Science
Average
Point
Score
L4+
L5
L4+
L5
L4+
LA Average
84%
37%
81%
37%
89%
52%
28.4
England Average
80%
34%
77%
32%
88%
46%
27.9
82%
36%
73%
30%
91%
54%
28.1
Highlands Primary School
89
L5
Cranbrook Primary School
School opened after January
2007
L4+: Level 4 or above. The percentage of eligible pupils achieving Level 4 or above in the test.
Level 4 is the level expected of most 11 year olds.
L5: Level 5. The percentage of eligible pupils achieving Level 5 in the test. Level 5 means pupils
are achieving beyond the expected level.
Average point score (APS)
The APS provides a fuller picture of the KS2 achievements of pupils of all abilities. It allows for
easier discrimination between schools with similar percentages, showing those schools whose
pupils mostly fall below Level 4, or those who exceed that level.
Secondary Schools
Park School for Girls
Valentines High School
5 or more grades A* - C including English
and Maths GCSEs
Level 2 in functional English and Maths
Level 1 in functional English and Maths
Level 2 (5 or more grades A* - C)
Level 1 (5 or more grades A* - G)
85%
65%
85%
65%
100%
97%
96%
83%
100%
98%
2 Grades A* - C which cover the Key
Stage 4 science programme of study
At least one qualification
Average total point score per student
Total Students
96%
59%
100%
100%
467.5
519.2
47
180
30
LA
England
Average
Average
61.5%
46.8%
63.2%
50.3%
96.4%
90.8%
73.6%
62.0%
96.2%
91.7%
61.2%
50.3%
99.1%
98.9%
427.8
378.2
Cranbrook
Parks and Open Spaces:
The Borough enjoys one of the best living environments in London with a large number of
parks and open spaces. The Valentines Park and the Wanstead Recreation Ground
provides residents with recreational facilities. About 72% of Redbridge residents said they
were satisfied with the Borough’s parks and open spaces. Satisfaction of sports and leisure
facilities in the Borough is lower, with only 44% of Residents stating they are satisfied.
31
Cranbrook
Definitions and Explanations
Definitions and Explanations Issued by ONS
Most of the figures in this report are derived from the 2001 Census which was held on 29 April 2001. Further 2001 Census statistics are
available from the Neighbourhood Statistics site for areas in England and Wales and the SCROL site for areas in Scotland (2001 Census
data are not available from the Nomis wizard or advanced queries).
Census figures are used as these provide the only comprehensive source of labour market information at ward level. ONS' preferred
source for this information at higher levels (local authority, parliamentary constituency, regions) is the Labour Force Survey. Although
the ward profile includes comparative figures for local authorities and regions, ONS advises that at these geographic levels the LFS
figures available in the local authority profile should be used in preference to the Census figures in the ward profile. Further
information on comparing Census and LFS data is given below.
The wards used are referred to as CAS (Census Area Statistics) wards. These are based on administrative ward boundaries legally in
force at the end of 2002, which includes ward boundaries that became operative in a number of local authorities in May 2003, and
some others that become operative in May 2004.
In some cases, different tables may show different counts for the same population, this is due to disclosure protection measures used
to prevent the inadvertent disclosure of information about identifiable individuals.
Resident Population
Population Base. The 2001 Census has been conducted on a resident basis. This means the statistics relate to where people usually
live, as opposed to where they are on Census night. Students and schoolchildren studying away from the family home are counted as
resident at their term-time address. As in 1981 and 1991, residents absent from home on Census night were required to be included
on the Census form at their usual resident address. Wholly absent households were legally required to complete a Census form on
their return.
Working age includes males aged 16 to 64 and females aged 16 to 59.
Labour Supply
Economic activity: They relate to whether or not a person was working or looking for work in the week before Census. The concept of
Economic Activity is compatible with the International Labour Organisation (ILO) definition of economic status.
Economically active: All people who were working in the week before the Census are described as economically active. In addition,
the category includes people who were not working but were looking for work and were available to start work within 2 weeks. Fulltime students who are economically active are included.
Economic activity rate (working age): The number of people, who are economically active aged 16 to 59/64, expressed as a
percentage of all people aged 16 to 59/64.
Economically inactive: Within the Economic Activity classification, a person is either Economically Active or Inactive. Specific
categories of Economic Inactivity are: Retired, Student (excludes those students who were working or in some other way were
economically active), Looking after family/ home, Permanently sick/ disabled and Other. A person who is looking for work but is not
available to start work within 2 weeks is counted as Economically Inactive.
Main job: The main job is the job in which a person usually works the most hours. Questions on employment relate to each person’s
main job.
In employment: Any person who did paid work in the week before the Census, whether as an employee or self-employed, is
described as employed or in employment. ‘Paid work’ includes casual or temporary work, even if only for one hour; being on a
government-sponsored training scheme; being away from a job/business ill, on maternity leave, on holiday or temporarily laid off; or
doing paid or unpaid work for their own or family business.
Employment rate: The number of people in employment expressed as a percentage of the resident population.
Employee: The distinction between employee and self-employed is determined by the response to the question ‘Do (did) you work as
an employee or are (were) you self-employed?’ It relates to the person’s main job in the week before the Census or, if not working in
the week before the Census, their last main job.
Self-employed: The distinction between employee and self-employed is determined by the response to the question ‘Do (did) you
work as an employee or are (were) you self-employed?’ It relates to the person’s main job in the week before Census or, if not working
in the week before Census, their last main job.
Hours worked: The question on how many hours a week a person usually works in their main job is used to derive whether a person
is working full-time (31 hours or more a week) or part-time (30 hours or less per week).
Full-time working: Working full-time is defined as working 31 hours or more a week.
Part-time working: Working part-time is defined as working 30 hours or less a week.
Unemployed: A person is defined as unemployed if he or she is not in employment, is available to start work in the next 2 weeks and
has either looked for work in the last 4 weeks or is waiting to start a new job. This is consistent with the International Labour Office
(ILO) standard classification.
Occupation: A person’s occupation is coded from the response to the question asking for the full title of the Main job and the
description of what is done in that job. It is coded to the 2000 edition of the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC).
Qualifications: The term ‘no qualifications’ describes people without any academic, vocational or professional qualifications. The
term ‘lower level’ qualifications is used to describe qualifications equivalent to levels 1 to 3 of the National Key Learning Targets (i.e.
GSCE’s O levels, A levels, NVQ levels 1-3). The term ’Higher level’ refers to qualifications of levels 4 and above (i.e. first degrees, higher
degrees, NVQ levels 4 and 5, HND, HNC and certain professional qualifications).
32
Cranbrook
Working-age Benefits
JSA claimant count records the number of people claiming Jobseekers Allowance (JSA) and National Insurance credits at Jobcentre
Plus local offices. People claiming JSA must declare that they are out of work, capable of, available for and actively seeking work
during the week in which the claim is made.
The percentage figures express the number of claimants resident in an area as a percentage of the working age population resident in
that area. Working age is defined as 16-64 for males and 16-59 for females. The working age population figures used to calculate
proportions are derived from the mid-2002 population estimates for local authorities and Great Britain, and mid-2001 population
estimates for wards.
The count of total JSA claimants is mostly derived from the Jobcentre Plus computer records. For various reasons, e.g. when a
claimant's National Insurance number is not known, a few claims have to be dealt with manually by local offices. These clerical claims,
which amount to less than 1 per cent of the total, are counted separately and not analysed in as much detail as the computerised
claims. The count of total JSA claimants includes clerical claims, but only the computerised claims are analysed by age and duration.
Labour Demand
Labour demand includes information about jobs available in an area. Figures on this topic will be added to the profile when the
Census workplace data for CAS wards becomes available in May 2004.
Comparisons with LFS and Neighbourhood Statistics Census data
The 2001 Census asked people to answer a number of questions about different aspects of their working lives. These questions were
developed to approximate to those used in ONS' Labour Force Survey (LFS), which is the basis for the labour supply tables in the Local
Authority profile. These follow the internationally standard definitions set out in the guidelines of the International Labour
Organisation (ILO). However, the Census is self-completed by householders which means that data from this source can be classified
only approximately to the ILO definitions. Also, the Census includes people living in institutions, such as soldiers' barracks, which the
LFS does not, at present, cover fully.
As a result, comparisons between the Census and LFS results on the labour market can only be approximate. To minimise the
difference, the Census data in the Nomis ward profiles have been chosen to as closely match the LFS definitions as possible. The
Nomis ward profile figures, therefore, generally differ to those available through the Neighbourhood Statistics site. The main reasons
for this are:
•
•
Treatment of full-time students. In the Neighbourhood Statistics Census figures, full-time students are not included in the
separate figures for in employment or unemployed but are separately identified as economically active students. In the
Nomis ward profiles, economically active students are included in either the in employment or unemployed categories to
match the LFS definitions and ILO guidelines. Those in employment are considered to be employees.
Age groupings. The Census results available through Neighbourhood Statistics cover the 16-74 age group, whereas the
Census data in the Nomis ward profiles are typically presented for working age (16-64 for men and 16-59 for women).
In addition, there are a number of reasons why differences between the ways in which Census and LFS data are collected lead to
differences in estimates between the two sources. Census forms were distributed to each household, which completed the form and
returned it. LFS data is collected by interviewers, who can help the individual understand the questions and check some of the
information as it is provided.
ONS advise that the greater definitional precision of the LFS is sufficiently important that aggregate estimates of employment,
unemployment and inactivity from the LFS should be preferred to those from the Census.
ONS's expectation is that estimates of employment from the Census will be lower than those from the LFS, but estimates of
unemployment will be higher.
Source: ONS
33