27 th November 2008 Tom Smith and Stefan Noble Oxford Consultants for Social Inclusion (OCSI)

1. Deprivation levels and trends across East Sussex: Understanding the IMD2007 East Sussex Strategic Partnership Board 27th November 2008 Tom Smith and Stefan Noble Oxford Consultants for Social Inclusion (OCSI)

2. Overview • What does the IMD identify? • How is East Sussex performing (on other indicators)? • Understanding the IMD results

3. Two health warnings … • IMD is part of the story - not the only source … • Most recent data is from 2007, recent economic events not covered …

4. Deprivation levels – IMD 2007 • Blue = more deprived Yellow = less deprived

5. Change in deprivation – IMD2004-07 • Blue = increasing deprivation Yellow = decreasing deprivation

6. 1) What does the IMD identify? • IMD 2004 to 2007 suggests East Sussex more deprived • Moved from 11th to 7th most deprived shire County • All five Districts are more deprived in IMD 2007 • 78% of small areas are more deprived in IMD 2007 • IMD domain analysis • Increased relative deprivation levels in key IMD domains (Income, Employment, Health, Crime) • Education domain little change over time-points • Sharp deterioration in the Living Environment Domain

7. 2) How is East Sussex performing?

8. Summary of East Sussex performance

9. 3) Understanding the IMD results • County is improving on a range of key indicators … • … But, not keeping pace with other areas • Relative increase in deprivation levels • Caution over using modelled data to assess change • Living environment - biggest increase in deprivation across County • 19 of 21 LADs with greatest increases in combined air pollution levels are coastal Districts, including all 5 East Sussex • Removing the 2 modelled domains results in Hastings position not changing between IMD 2004 and 2007 • Living Environment and Barriers to Housing and Services over-estimate increase in relative deprivation

10. Change in deprivation – IMD2004-07 • Blue = increasing deprivation Yellow = decreasing deprivation

11. Change excluding domains • Blue = increasing deprivation Yellow = decreasing deprivation

12. Other findings • Living conditions have improved since the IMD2007 • Improved faster than between IMD2004 and 2007 • But … still not keeping pace with other areas • The most deprived areas fared better than the average • The 13 areas in most deprived national 10% improved ranking • Hastings IMD position is stable, once impact of living environment is removed • Income and crime domains showed improvement • 50% of areas in Hastings are improving • Some indicators show good news, eg adult skills, crime • Not all these indicators included in the IMD

13. Summary • Living conditions … generally improving … but not keeping pace with elsewhere • Leading to increase in relative deprivation levels (IMD) • IMD likely to overstate the increase in relative deprivation levels • Impact of modelled domains is significant • Analysis of change over time should focus on direct measures of deprivation, not modelled • Key socio-economic indicators show good news on direction of travel, but … • Challenges where County not keeping pace