Post on 19-Jan-2016
Making neighbourhoods matter
Joe MontgomeryOffice of the Deputy Prime Minister
Public Sector : 8
Private Sector : 13
Local Authority :
53
Voluntary/Community Sector : 8
Other : 5
Other = MP, RSL, Faith, Independent & Chair rotated between sectors
LSP Chairs in NRF areas by
sector
Reducing health inequalities through Local Strategic
Partnerships LAs and PCTs are key partners on Local
Strategic Partnerships
Need to align their priorities, activities and pool budgets to make the greatest impact
PCTs currently chair 5 out of 87 LSPs and PCTs/HAs/NHS are represented on all
LAs and PCTs are key partners on Local Strategic Partnerships
Need to align their priorities, activities and pool budgets to make the greatest impact
PCTs currently chair 5 out of 87 LSPs and PCTs/HAs/NHS are represented on all
National increase in NRF from 2001-2006
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06
NRF Allocations
(£m)£200m
£300m
£400m
£450m
£525m
Health, £67.5m, (15%)
Local Priorities (eg children & young
people, older people and community development), £58.5m, (13%)
Education, £85.5m, (19%)
Housing & Physical Environment, £54.0m, (12%)
Employment, £54.0m, (12%)
Transport, £4.5m, (1%)
Crime, £90.0m, (20%)
Other (including cross-cutting
issues), £13.5m, (3%)
LSP Support and Administration,
£22.5m, (5%)
Planned spend by theme of NRF 2004/5
* 2003/04 is revised data, all other years are final data (NB figures may not sum due to rounding). 88 NRF average relates to maintained schools only and discounts pupils recently arrived from abroad. The England average is based on all relevant schools and includes pupils from overseas.
Source: DfES Produced by the NRU’s Performance Analysis Team (Research and Development), March 2005
Percentage of pupils achieving 5+ GCSEs A*-C, 1997/98 to 2003/04* NRF LA showing highest improvement rate - Islington
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
1997/98 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04*
% p
as
s r
ate England
NRF 88 LAs
Islington
Imp
rove
men
t
Gap: 10.2
Gap: 7.6
* 2003/04 is revised data, all other years are final data (NB figures may not sum due to rounding). 88 NRF average relates to maintained schools only and discounts pupils recently arrived from abroad. The England average is based on all relevant schools and includes pupils from overseas.
Source: DfES Produced by the NRU’s Performance Analysis Team (Research and Development), March 2005
Percentage of pupils achieving Key Stage 2 Level 4 English, 1997/98 to 2003/04* LA showing highest improvement rate - Nottingham
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
1997/98 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04*
%
England
NRF 88 LAs
Nottingham
Imp
rov
em
en
t
Gap: 5.5
Gap: 3.5
* 2003/04 is revised data, all other years are final data (NB figures may not sum due to rounding). 88 NRF average relates to maintained schools only and discounts pupils recently arrived from abroad. The England average is based on all relevant schools and includes pupils from overseas.
Source: DfES Produced by the NRU’s Performance Analysis Team (Research and Development), March 2005
Percentage of pupils achieving Key Stage 2 Level 4 Maths, 1997/98 to 2003/04* NRF LA showing highest improvement rate - Nottingham
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
1997/98 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04*
%
England
NRF 88 LAs
Nottingham
Imp
rov
em
en
t
Gap: 5.7
Gap: 2.8
New Floor Targets:Education
Each school to get at least 30% of pupils to achieve 5 GCSEs at grades A* to C by 2008
11 year olds – reduce by 40% the proportion of schools in which fewer than 65% of pupils gain level 4 English and maths by 2008
14 year olds – in each school at least 50% of pupils to achieve level 5 or above in English, maths and science by 2008
Each school to get at least 30% of pupils to achieve 5 GCSEs at grades A* to C by 2008
11 year olds – reduce by 40% the proportion of schools in which fewer than 65% of pupils gain level 4 English and maths by 2008
14 year olds – in each school at least 50% of pupils to achieve level 5 or above in English, maths and science by 2008
Graph shows recorded crime by Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership area, per 1,000 households. (NB figures may not sum due to rounding).
Source: Home Office (England average calculated by NRU) Produced by the NRU’s Performance Analysis Team (Research and Development), March 2005
Burglaries per 1,000 households, 1999/00 to 2003/04NRF LA showing highest improvement rate - Lincoln
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04
Ra
te (
pe
r 1
,00
0 h
ou
se
ho
lds
)
NRF 88 LAs
Lincoln
England
Imp
rove
men
t The new National Crime Recording Standard means that 2002/03 data is not comparable with previous years
Gap: 9.8
Gap: 8.1
Graph shows recorded crime by Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership area, per 1,000 population. (NB figures may not sum due to rounding).
Source: Home Office (England average calculated by NRU) Produced by the NRU’s Performance Analysis Team (Research and Development), March 2005
Robberies per 1,000 population, 1999/00 to 2003/04NRF LA showing highest improvement rate - Westminster
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04
Ra
te (
pe
r 1
,00
0 p
op
ula
tio
n)
Westminster
NRF 88 LAs
England
Imp
rove
men
t
The new National Crime Recording Standard means that 2002/03 data is not comparable with previous years
Gap: 1.6Gap: 1.6
Graph shows recorded crime (theft of and theft from a vehicle) by Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership area, per 1,000 population. (NB figures may not sum due to rounding).
Source: Home Office (England average calculated by NRU) Produced by the NRU’s Performance Analysis Team (Research and Development), March 2005
Vehicle Crime per 1,000 population, 1999/00 to 2003/04NRF LA showing highest improvement rate - Hastings
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04
Ra
te (
pe
r 1
,00
0 p
op
ula
tio
n)
Hastings
NRF 88 LAs
England
Imp
rove
men
t
The new National Crime Recording Standard means that 2002/03 data is not comparable with previous years
Gap: 6.9
Gap: 5.9
New Floor Targets:Crime
Reduce crime by 15% and by more in the 40 high crime areas by 2007-08
Reduce crime by 15% and by more in the 40 high crime areas by 2007-08
Graph shows Life Expectancy at birth by NRF area and England 3 year averages. (NB figures may not sum due to rounding). All figures are based on the revised mid-year population estimates (published in October 2004)
Source: ONS/DoH Produced by the NRU’s Performance Analysis Team (Research and Development), March 2005
Male Life Expectancy, 1996-98 to 2001-03NRF LA showing highest improvement rate - Kensington and Chelsea
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
1996-98 1997-99 1998-00 1999-01 2000-02 2001-03
Mal
e L
E (
year
s)
Kensingtonand Chelsea
England
NRF 88 LAs
Imp
rove
men
t
Gap: 1.5
Gap: 1.5
Graph shows Life Expectancy at birth by NRF area and England 3 year averages. (NB figures may not sum due to rounding). All figures are based on the revised mid-year population estimates (published in October 2004)
Source: ONS/DoH Produced by the NRU’s Performance Analysis Team (Research and Development), March 2005
Female Life Expectancy, 1996-98 to 2001-03 NRF LA showing highest improvement rate - Kensington and Chelsea
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
1996-98 1997-99 1998-00 1999-01 2000-02 2001-03
Fe
ma
le L
E (
ye
ars
)
Kensington andChelsea
England
NRF 88 LAs
Imp
rove
men
t
Gap: 1.0
Gap: 1.0
New Floor Targets:Health inequalities
Reduce gap in life expectancy between areas with the worst health and deprivation indicators and the rest by 10% by 2010
Reduce gap in life expectancy between areas with the worst health and deprivation indicators and the rest by 10% by 2010
All figures are based on the revised mid-year population estimates (published in Oct 2004)
Source: ONS/DoH Produced by the ODPM’s Performance Analysis Team (NRU), March 2005
All Cancers Mortality Rate, 1995-97 to 2001-03Sheffield, Manchester, Worst fifth of LAs (Spearhead Group) and
England
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
1995-97 1998-00 2001-03
Rat
e (p
er 1
00,0
00 p
op
ula
tio
n)
Sheffield
Manchester
SpearheadGroup
EnglandGap: 19.1
Gap: 20.7
Gap: 46.7
Gap: 48.0
*Data includes mortality rates for Coronary Heart Disease, stroke and related conditions All figures are based on the revised mid-year population estimates (published in Oct 2004)
Source: ONS/DoH Produced by the ODPM’s Performance Analysis Team (NRU), March 2005
Circulatory Disease* Mortality Rates, 1995-97 to 2001-03Sheffield, Manchester, Worst fifth of LAs (Spearhead Group) and
England
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
220
1995-97 1998-00 2001-03
Ra
te (
pe
r 1
00,0
00
po
pu
lati
on
)
Sheffield
Manchester
SpearheadGroup
England
Gap: 28.7
Gap: 36.7
Gap: 65.9
Gap: 70.4
New Floor Targets:Health
Reduce the gaps between areas with the worst health and deprivation indicators and the population as a whole by 2010:
in cancer by 6% in heart diseases by 40% reduce adult smoking rates below 21%
(and to 26% amongst poorer groups)
Reduce the gaps between areas with the worst health and deprivation indicators and the population as a whole by 2010:
in cancer by 6% in heart diseases by 40% reduce adult smoking rates below 21%
(and to 26% amongst poorer groups)
Produced by the ODPM’s Performance Analysis Team (NRU), March 2005
NRF and Worst fifth of areas (Spearhead Group) overlap
Worst fifth of areas (Spearhead Group)
Neighbourhood Renewal Fund and Spearhead Group areas
Carlisle District Tower Hamlets London Borough Sandwell DistrictBarrow-in-Furness District Islington London Borough South Tyneside DistrictBolsover District Hackney London Borough St. Helens DistrictEasington District Haringey London Borough Sunderland DistrictSedgefield District Newham London Borough Tameside DistrictDerwentside District Barking and Dagenham London Borough Wakefield DistrictWear Valley District Barnsley District Walsall DistrictChester-le-Street District Birmingham District Wigan DistrictRossendale District Bolton District Wirral DistrictPreston District Bradford District Blackburn with DarwenPendle District Bury District BlackpoolHyndburn District City of Wolverhampton District City of Kingston upon HullBurnley District Coventry District City of LeicesterLincoln District Doncaster District City of NottinghamCorby District Gateshead District City of Stoke-on-TrentBlyth Valley District Knowsley District HaltonWansbeck District Liverpool District HartlepoolTamworth District Manchester District MiddlesbroughNuneaton and Bedworth District Newcastle upon Tyne District North East LincolnshireLambeth London Borough North Tyneside District Redcar and ClevelandSouthwark London Borough Oldham District Stockton-on-TeesLewisham London Borough Rochdale District WarringtonGreenwich London Borough Rotherham DistrictHammersmith and Fulham London Borough Salford District
Local Authorities in the Worst Fifth of areas(Spearhead Group) and NRF areas in red
* England average for 2001-03 is indicative only. Under 18s conceptions per 1,000 15 to 17 year olds, 3-year average. (NB figures may not sum due to rounding). All figures are based on the revised mid-year population estimates (published in October 2004)
Source: ONS/DoH Produced by the NRU’s Performance Analysis Team (Research and Development), March 2005
Teenage Conceptions, 1996-98 to 2001-03*NRF LA showing high improvement rate - Portsmouth
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
1996-98 1997-99 1998-00 1999-01 2000-02 2001-03*
Rat
e (p
er 1
,000
15-
17 y
ear
old
fem
ales
)
NRF 88 LAs
England
Portsmouth
Imp
rov
em
en
t
Gap: 12.6
Gap: 11.6
New Floor Targets:Teenage conception
Reduce the under-18 conception rate by 50% by 2010
Reduce the under-18 conception rate by 50% by 2010
Creating Healthier Communities
New guidance from ODPM and DH
A resource pack for local partnerships
Practical help and signposts to resources
Tools including Scrutiny arrangements, Health Impact Assessment, Health Equity Audit and key interventions
New guidance from ODPM and DH
A resource pack for local partnerships
Practical help and signposts to resources
Tools including Scrutiny arrangements, Health Impact Assessment, Health Equity Audit and key interventions
You can order copies of the resource pack today, and
See a demonstration at the ODPM and DH stand
You can order copies of the resource pack today, and
See a demonstration at the ODPM and DH stand
www.neighbourhood.gov.uk
Graph shows population weighted average employment rates from March 1997 to February 2004. (NB figures may not sum due to rounding).
Source: Annual Local Area Labour Force Survey Produced by the NRU’s Performance Analysis Team (Research and Development), March 2005
Employment Rate, 1997/98 to 2003/04NRF LA showing highest improvement rate - Great Yarmouth
60
65
70
75
80
1997/98 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04
Ra
te
England
GreatYarmouth
NRF 88 LAs
Imp
rove
men
t
Gap: 6.1
Gap: 5.8
New Floor Targets:Employment
Increase the employment rate in the worst wards, reducing the gap between these areas and the overall rate by 1%, and close the gap by 1% for:
black and ethnic minority groups over 50s low skilled
And for lone parents by 2%
Increase the employment rate in the worst wards, reducing the gap between these areas and the overall rate by 1%, and close the gap by 1% for:
black and ethnic minority groups over 50s low skilled
And for lone parents by 2%
Percentage of all Non-Decent Social Sector Dwellings, 1996 to 2003England and NRF 88 LAs
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
1996 2001 2003
%
NRF 88 LAs
England
Gap: 1.6
Gap: 1.7
Graph is based on EHCS data. Note: 1996 and 2001 data have been revised, together with the release of new year of data for 2003. (NB figures may not sum due to rounding)
Source: ODPMProduced by the NRU’s Performance Analysis Team (Research and Development), March 2005
New Floor Targets: Decent Homes
By 2010, bring all social housing into a decent condition with most of this improvement taking place in deprived areas
By 2010, bring all social housing into a decent condition with most of this improvement taking place in deprived areas
New Floor Targets: Liveability
Reduce unacceptable levels of litter and detritus in NRF areas at a greater rate than for Local Authority Districts nationally
Reduce unacceptable levels of litter and detritus in NRF areas at a greater rate than for Local Authority Districts nationally
Emma, mother at 18, living on benefits, few aspirations until offered a part-time admin job aimed at single parents in Braunstone
Emma’s now an events officer earning £20K and about to buy her council house - “a totally different person from four years ago”
Streets Ahead Initiative, Liverpool
In 2003, Jenny, a single mother aged 25 from Speke, was isolated after leaving employment in 2001
Streets Ahead, promoting job and training opportunities and services available, told Jenny about Sure Start
Jenny became involved in the “Parent Net” programme and completed a range of training courses.
In 2004 she set up the Tots Café offering families an intro to nutritious and healthy meals
In 2003, Jenny, a single mother aged 25 from Speke, was isolated after leaving employment in 2001
Streets Ahead, promoting job and training opportunities and services available, told Jenny about Sure Start
Jenny became involved in the “Parent Net” programme and completed a range of training courses.
In 2004 she set up the Tots Café offering families an intro to nutritious and healthy meals
Jenny’s now employed as a parent mentor and a Company Director of Sure Start Ltd