|
Untitled Document
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation
Measure 2005 Help
Click on the geography links below for help with the measures.
Super Output Area
Output Area
Local Government District
Parliamentary Constituency
Super Output Area Measures
Multiple Deprivation Measure
The overall Multiple Deprivation Measure 2005 describes SOAs by combining information from all seven domains: Income Deprivation, Employment Deprivation, Health Deprivation and Disability, Education Skills and Training Deprivation, Proximity to Services Deprivation, Living Environment Deprivation, and Crime and Disorder. The NI MDM 2005 score is the combined sum of the weighted, exponentially transformed domain rank of the domain scores. The weights used were as follows:
| Domain |
Weight |
| Income Deprivation |
25% |
| Employment Deprivation |
25% |
| Health Deprivation and Disability |
15% |
| Education, Skills and Training Deprivation |
15% |
| Proximity to Services Deprivation |
10% |
| Living Environment Deprivation |
5% |
| Crime and Disorder |
5% |
The bigger the NI MDM 2005 score, the more deprived the SOA. However, because of the exponential distribution, it is not possible to say, for example, that an SOA with a score of 40 is twice as deprived as an SOA with a score of 20. In order to make comparisons between SOAs it is recommended that ranks should be used. A rank of 1 is assigned to the most deprived SOA, and a rank of 890 is assigned to the least deprived SOA.
Income Domain
The purpose of this domain is to capture the proportions of the population experiencing income deprivation in an area. The indicators used were:
- Adults and children in Income Support households
- Adults and children in Income based Job Seeker’s Allowance households
- Adults and children in Working Families’ Tax Credit households whose equivalised income (excluding housing benefits) is below 60% of median before housing costs
- Adults and children in Disabled Person’s Tax Credit households whose equivalised income (excluding housing benefits) is below 60% of median before housing costs
The indicators for this domain were summed and expressed as a rate of the relevant population (the whole population aged 18-59 plus men aged 60-64). Shrinkage technique was applied.
The scores for the Income Deprivation Domain are rates. So, for example, if an SOA scores 38.6 in the Income Deprivation Domain, this means that 38.6% of the SOA’s population are income deprived.
Income Deprivation Affecting Children Measure
The supplementary Income Deprivation Affecting Children (IDAC) measure is a subset of the Income Deprivation Domain, and shows the percentage of children in each SOA that live in families that are income deprived (i.e. in receipt of IS, JSA-IB, or WFTC/DPTC below a given threshold). The IDAC measure is not combined with the other domains into the overall NI MDM 2005 as the children are already captured in the Income Deprivation Domain. An IDAC measure score of for example, 24.6 means that 24.6% of children aged less than 16 in that SOA are living in families that are income deprived. A rank of 1 is assigned to the most deprived SOA, and a rank of 890 is assigned to the least deprived SOA.
Income Deprivation Affecting Older People Measure
The supplementary Income Deprivation Affecting Older People (IDAOP) measure is a subset of the Income Deprivation Domain. This comprises the percentage of an SOA’s population aged 60 and over who are IS/JSA-IB claimants aged 60 and over and their partners (if also aged 60 or over). The IDAOP measure is not combined with the other domains into the overall NI MDM 2005 as these income deprived older people are already captured in the Income Deprivation Domain. A rank of 1 is assigned to the most deprived SOA, and a rank of 890 is assigned to the least deprived SOA.
Employment Domain
This domain measures employment deprivation conceptualised as involuntary exclusion of the working age population from the world of work. The indicators used were:
- Unemployment claimant count (JUVOS) of women aged 18-59 and men aged 18-64 averaged over 4 quarters
- Incapacity Benefit claimants women aged 18-59 and men aged 18-64.
- Severe Disablement Allowance claimants women aged 18-59 and men aged 18-64
- Participants in New Deal for Young People (18-24 years) who are not included in the claimant count
- Participants in New Deal for 25+ who are not included in the claimant count
- Invalid Care Allowance claimants women aged 18-59 and men aged 18-64
The indicators for this domain were summed and expressed as a rate of the relevant population (the whole population aged 18-59 plus men aged 60-64). Shrinkage technique was applied.
The scores for the Employment Deprivation Domain are rates. So, for example, if an SOA scores 35.5 in the Employment Deprivation Domain, this means that 35.5% of the SOA’s population are employment deprived.
Health Deprivation and Disability Domain
This domain identifies areas with relatively high rates of people who die prematurely or whose quality of life is impaired by poor health or who are disabled, across the whole population i.e. in this domain health deprivation, is unexpected deaths or levels of ill health. The indicators used were:
- Years of Potential Life Lost
- Comparative Illness and Disability Ratio
- A combined measure of two indicators (i) individuals suffering from mood or anxiety disorders, based on prescribing and (ii) suicides
- People registered as having cancer (excluding non-melanoma skin cancers)
The indicators were combined in two steps, although each step follows the same process. First, the mood or anxiety disorders indicators were combined to form one measure. Then this measure along with the other indicators was combined into the overall domain measure. Within both these processes the indicators were shrunk, ranked and then their ranks transformed to a standard normal distribution. Factor analysis was used to produce the weights for combining them into an overall Health Deprivation and Disability Domain score.
Education, Skills and Training Domain
The purpose of the domain is to capture the extent of deprivation in education, skills and training in a local area.
Two sub-domains were created: the Adult sub-domain measures the deprivation in the resident adult population, while the Children/Young people sub-domain measures the deprivation in the achievement of qualifications and access to education.
Sub-Domain: Children/Young people
- GCSE/GNVQ points score
- Key Stage 3 data
- Proportions of those leaving school aged 16 and not entering Further Education
- Absenteeism at secondary level
- Proportions of 17-20 year olds who have not successfully applied for Higher Education
- Proportions of Years 11 and 12 pupils not in a grammar school
- Proportions of post primary pupils with an SEN code in mainstream schools
Sub-Domain: Working age adults
- Proportions of working age adults (aged 25-59) in the area with no or low levels of qualification
A shrinkage estimation technique was used in the creation of each sub domain. The standardised results for both sub-domains were then exponentially transformed, and combined with equal weights to create the overall Education, Skills and Training Deprivation Domain score.
Proximity to Services Domain
The purpose of this domain is to measure the extent to which people have poor geographical access to certain key services, measured in terms of road distance to the nearest services. Indicators used were road distance to a:
- GP premises
- Accident and Emergency hospital
- Dentist
- Optician
- Pharmacist
- Job Centre or Jobs and Benefit office
- Post Office
- Food shop
- Centre of a settlement of 10,000 or more people
The indicator scores were transformed to a normal distribution, and then combined using equal weights except for the road distance to an A&E hospital, which was awarded a double weight.
Living Environment Domain
The purpose of this domain is to identify deprivation relating to the living environment. Three types of measures of the quality and ease of access to housing and the physical environment are included in this domain: a sub-domain for the quality of housing, a sub-domain for issues of access to housing, and an indicator of the quality of the outdoor physical environment. The indicators used were:
Sub-Domain: Housing quality
- Ward level housing stress
- Houses without central heating
Sub-Domain: Housing access
- Household overcrowding
- LGD level rate of acceptances under the homelessness provisions of the Housing (Northern Ireland) Order 1988 and the Housing (Northern Ireland) Order 2003, assigned to the constituent SOAs
Sub-Domain: Outdoor physical environment
- Ward level local area problem score
The indicators within each sub-domain were standardised by ranking the rates, and then transformed to a normal distribution. In the Housing Quality sub-domain the indicators were combined with equal weights; in the Housing Access sub-domain, overcrowding was accorded a weight of 80% while homelessness, as it measures homelessness at LGD rather than SOA level, was accorded a weight of 20%. The sub-domains were then ranked and transformed to an exponential distribution and combined with equal weights.
Crime and Disorder Domain
This domain measures the rate of crime and disorder at small area level. The inclusion of fire brigade data and police incident data resulted in a broadening of the definition of the domain beyond measuring the risk of criminal victimisation at small area level. The indicators are grouped into two sub-domains:
Sub-Domain: Crime
- Violence, robbery and public order
- Burglary
- Vehicle theft
- Criminal damage
Sub-Domain: Disorder
- Malicious and deliberate primary fires
- Disturbances
Within the Crime sub-domain, each of the four indicators was ranked, transformed to a normal distribution and combined using equal weights. In the Disorder sub-domain, the indicators of ‘disturbances’ and ‘malicious primary fires’ were ranked, transformed to a normal distribution and combined using weights of 60% and 40% respectively. The final Crime and Disorder Domain score was then constructed by exponentially transforming and combining the two sub-domains using weights of 60% for the Crime sub-domain and 40% for the Disorder sub-domain.
Top of document
Output Area Measures
The Economic Deprivation measure consists of the OA level Income Deprivation, Employment Deprivation and Proximity to Services Deprivation Domains, combined with weights that are proportionate to those used for the overall NI MDM 2005. The weights are as follows:
- Income Deprivation Domain – 41.7%
- Employment Deprivation Domain – 41.7%
- Proximity to Services Domain – 16.6%
The Economic Deprivation measure does not form part of the overall NI MDM 2005 but is a stand-alone measure, which will aid in identifying very small pockets of deprivation.
Top of document
Local Government District Measures
Six summary measures of the overall NI MDM 2005 have been produced at LGD level describing differences between LGDs. The summary measures at LGD level focus on different aspects of multiple deprivation in the area. No single summary measure is favoured over another, as there is no single best way of describing or comparing LGDs.
- Local Concentration
- Extent
- Income Scale
- Employment Scale
- Average of SOA ranks
- Average of SOA scores
There are twenty-six LGDs in Northern Ireland. For each measure each LGD is given a rank and score (with the exception of Extent, as explained below). For presentation, a rank of 1 indicates that the LGD is the most deprived according to the measure, and 26 is the least deprived.
Local Concentration
Local Concentration is the population weighted average of the ranks of a LGD’s most deprived SOAs that contain exactly 10% of the LGD’s population.
Local Concentration is an important way of identifying LGDs’ ‘hot spots’ of deprivation. The Local Concentration measure defines the hot spots by reference to a percentage of the LGD's population. This involves taking the mean of the population weighted rank of a LGD’s most deprived SOAs that capture exactly 10% of the LGD’s population. In many cases this was not always a whole number of SOAs. For the purpose of calculating this score the SOAs are ranked such that the most deprived SOA is given the rank of 890.
Worked example
An example might be a LGD containing 10,000 people. Ten percent of this population is 1,000 people. The Local Concentration measure would calculate the score of the most deprived SOAs containing exactly 1,000 people. Having sorted the SOAs in descending order of deprivation, the most deprived SOA contains 800 people and has a rank of 300 (out of 890, where 890 is the most deprived SOA for this calculation). The next most deprived SOA contains 600 people and has a rank of 100. 200 people from the second SOA are required to reach the total of 1,000 people (which is 10% of the LGD’s population). The Local Concentration score for this LGD would be:
((800/1000) x 300) + ((200/1000) x 100)
= (0.8 x 300) + (0.2 x 100)
= 260.
The larger the Local Concentration score, the more deprived the LGD, on this measure. The most deprived LGD on this measure is given a rank of 1.
Extent
Proportion of a LGD’s population living in the most deprived SOAs in the country.
The aim of this measure is to portray how widespread high levels of deprivation are in a LGD. It only includes LGDs that contain SOAs that fall within the most deprived 30% of SOAs in Northern Ireland.
In this measure, 100% of the people living in the 10% most deprived SOAs in Northern Ireland are captured in the numerator, plus a proportion of the population of those SOAs in the next two deciles on a sliding scale – that is 95% of the population of the SOA at the 11th percentile, and 5% of the population of the SOA at the 29th percentile. This makes the cut-off point less abrupt for this measure. The denominator is the total population of the specified LGD.
Worked example
An example might be a LGD with 10 SOAs. Five of the SOAs are within the most deprived 10% of SOAs in Northern Ireland on the Multiple Deprivation Measure and a further two are within the most deprived 30% - one at the 11th percentile and one at the 29th percentile. All of the populations of the five SOAs in the most deprived 10%, together with 95% of the population of the SOA at the 11th percentile and 5% of the population of the SOA at the 29th percentile are aggregated and divided by the LGD’s total population and presented as a percentage. So, the populations of the five SOAs in the most deprived 10% are 1,500, 1,800, 1,850, 1,900 and 2,000. The population of the SOA at the 11th percentile is 1,500 and that of the SOA at the 29th percentile is 1,750. The total LGD population is 16,000. The Extent score is therefore:
((((1500 + 1800 + 1850 + 1900 + 2000) x 1) + (1500 x 0.95) + (1750 x 0.05))/16000) x 100
= 66%
The LGD scores are ranked in descending order, so the LGD with the highest percentage is given a rank of 1.
Income Scale
Income Scale is the number of people who are income deprived
This measure is designed to give an indication of the sheer numbers of people experiencing income deprivation at LGD level. The Income Scale score is a count of individuals experiencing this deprivation.
The number of people in low-income families in each SOA (i.e. the numerator in the Income Deprivation Domain) was summed to give the Income Scale score. The LGD scores are ranked in descending order, so the LGD with the largest number of income deprived people is ranked 1.
Employment Scale
Employment Scale is the number of people who are employment deprived.
This measure is designed to give an indication of the sheer numbers of people experiencing employment deprivation at LGD level. The Employment Scale score is a count of individuals experiencing this deprivation.
The number of people of working age involuntarily out of the labour market (i.e. the numerator in the Employment Deprivation Domain) in each SOA for a LGD was summed to give the Employment Scale score. The LGD scores are ranked in descending order, so the LGD with the largest number of employment deprived people is ranked 1.
Average of SOA ranks
Population weighted average of the combined ranks for the SOAs in a LGD.
This measure summarises the LGD taken as a whole, including both deprived and less deprived SOAs. All the SOAs in a LGD need to be included to obtain such an average, as each SOA contributes to the character of that LGD. This measure is calculated by averaging all of the SOA ranks in each LGD. For the purpose of calculating this score the SOAs are ranked such that the most deprived SOA is given a rank of 890. The SOA ranks are population weighted within a LGD to take account of the fact that SOA size can vary.
Worked example
A LGD has ten SOAs with populations of 1,700, 1,500, 2,000, 1,900, 1,850, 1,750, 1,950, and 1,800. These SOAs rank 100, 278, 500, 489, 27, 762, 439 and 824 respectively (for the purposes of the calculation the ranks are such that 1=least deprived). The total LGD population is 10,000. In order to calculate the score, each SOA rank is multiplied by the proportion of the LGD’s population that falls in that SOA. These are summed to make the LGD score. Thus, the average SOA rank for this LGD is:
((1700/14450) x 100) + ((1500/14450) x 278) + ((2000/14450) x 500) + ((1900/14450) x 489) + ((1850/14450) x 27) + ((1750/14450) x 762) + ((1950/14450) x 439) + ((1800/14450) x 824)
= 431.75
The LGD scores are ranked in descending order, and the most deprived LGD (which has the largest score) is given a rank of 1 for presentation.
Average of SOA scores
Population weighted average of the combined scores for the SOAs in a LGD
This measure describes the LGD as a whole, taking into account the full range of SOA scores across a LGD. The advantage of the Average of SOA Score measure is that it describes the SOA by retaining the fact that the more deprived SOA may have more ‘extreme’ scores, which is not revealed to the same extent if the ranks are used. This measure is calculated by averaging the SOA scores in each LGD after they have been population weighted. This is calculated in exactly the same way as the Average of SOA Ranks measure, except that the Multiple Deprivation Measure SOA score is used instead of the SOA rank.
Top of document
Parliamentary Constituency Measures
In addition to creating six LGD level summaries of the NI MDM 2005, these six summaries have also been produced for the eighteen Parliamentary Constituencies in Northern Ireland. The methodologies used were identical to those for the LGDs. The summary measures at PC level focus on different aspects of multiple deprivation in the area. No single summary measure is favoured over another, as there is no single best way of describing or comparing PCs.
- Local Concentration
- Extent
- Income Scale
- Employment Scale
- Average of SOA ranks
- Average of SOA scores
There are eighteen PCs in Northern Ireland. For each measure each PC is given a rank and score (with the exception of Extent, as explained below). For presentation, a rank of 1 indicates that the PC is the most deprived according to the measure, and 18 is the least deprived.
Local Concentration
Local Concentration is the population weighted average of the ranks of a PC’s most deprived SOAs that contain exactly 10% of the PC’s population.
Local Concentration is an important way of identifying PCs’ ‘hot spots’ of deprivation. The Local Concentration measure defines the hot spots by reference to a percentage of the PC's population. This involves taking the mean of the population weighted rank of a PC’s most deprived SOAs that capture exactly 10% of the PC’s population. In many cases this was not always a whole number of SOAs. For the purpose of calculating this score the SOAs are ranked such that the most deprived SOA is given the rank of 890.
Worked example
An example might be a PC containing 10,000 people. Ten percent of this population is 1,000 people. The Local Concentration measure would calculate the score of the most deprived SOAs containing exactly 1,000 people. Having sorted the SOAs in descending order of deprivation, the most deprived SOA contains 800 people and has a rank of 300 (out of 890, where 890 is the most deprived SOA for this calculation). The next most deprived SOA contains 600 people and has a rank of 100. 200 people from the second SOA are required to reach the total of 1,000 people (which is 10% of the PC’s population). The Local Concentration score for this PC would be:
((800/1000) x 300) + ((200/1000) x 100)
= (0.8 x 300) + (0.2 x 100)
= 260.
The larger the Local Concentration score, the more deprived the PC, on this measure. The most deprived PC on this measure is given a rank of 1.
Extent
Proportion of a PC’s population living in the most deprived SOAs in the country.
The aim of this measure is to portray how widespread high levels of deprivation are in a PC. It only includes PCs that contain SOAs that fall within the most deprived 30% of SOAs in Northern Ireland.
In this measure, 100% of the people living in the 10% most deprived SOAs in Northern Ireland are captured in the numerator, plus a proportion of the population of those SOAs in the next two deciles on a sliding scale – that is 95% of the population of the SOA at the 11th percentile, and 5% of the population of the SOA at the 29th percentile. This makes the cut-off point less abrupt for this measure. The denominator is the total population of the specified PC.
Worked example
An example might be a PC with 10 SOAs. Five of the SOAs are within the most deprived 10% of SOAs in Northern Ireland on the Multiple Deprivation Measure and a further two are within the most deprived 30% - one at the 11th percentile and one at the 29th percentile. All of the populations of the five SOAs in the most deprived 10%, together with 95% of the population of the SOA at the 11th percentile and 5% of the population of the SOA at the 29th percentile are aggregated and divided by the PC’s total population and presented as a percentage. So, the populations of the five SOAs in the most deprived 10% are 1,500, 1,800, 1,850, 1,900 and 2,000. The population of the SOA at the 11th percentile is 1,500 and that of the SOA at the 29th percentile is 1,750. The total PC population is 16,000. The Extent score is therefore:
((((1500 + 1800 + 1850 + 1900 + 2000) x 1) + (1500 x 0.95) + (1750 x 0.05))/16000) x 100
= 66%
The PC scores are ranked in descending order, so the PC with the highest percentage is given a rank of 1.
Income Scale
Income Scale is the number of people who are income deprived
This measure is designed to give an indication of the sheer numbers of people experiencing income deprivation at PC level. The Income Scale score is a count of individuals experiencing this deprivation.
The number of people in low-income families in each SOA (i.e. the numerator in the Income Deprivation Domain) was summed to give the Income Scale score. The PC scores are ranked in descending order, so the PC with the largest number of income deprived people is ranked 1.
Employment Scale
Employment Scale is the number of people who are employment deprived.
This measure is designed to give an indication of the sheer numbers of people experiencing employment deprivation at PC level. The Employment Scale score is a count of individuals experiencing this deprivation.
The number of people of working age involuntarily out of the labour market (i.e. the numerator in the Employment Deprivation Domain) in each SOA for a PC was summed to give the Employment Scale score. The PC scores are ranked in descending order, so the PC with the largest number of employment deprived people is ranked 1.
Average of SOA ranks
Population weighted average of the combined ranks for the SOAs in a PC.
This measure summarises the PC taken as a whole, including both deprived and less deprived SOAs. All the SOAs in a PC need to be included to obtain such an average, as each SOA contributes to the character of that PC. This measure is calculated by averaging all of the SOA ranks in each PC. For the purpose of calculating this score the SOAs are ranked such that the most deprived SOA is given a rank of 890. The SOA ranks are population weighted within a PC to take account of the fact that SOA size can vary.
Worked example
A PC has ten SOAs with populations of 1,700, 1,500, 2,000, 1,900, 1,850, 1,750, 1,950, and 1,800. These SOAs rank 100, 278, 500, 489, 27, 762, 439 and 824 respectively (for the purposes of the calculation the ranks are such that 1=least deprived). The total PC population is 10,000. In order to calculate the score, each SOA rank is multiplied by the proportion of the PC’s population that falls in that SOA. These are summed to make the PC score. Thus, the average SOA rank for this PC is:
((1700/14450) x 100) + ((1500/14450) x 278) + ((2000/14450) x 500) + ((1900/14450) x 489) + ((1850/14450) x 27) + ((1750/14450) x 762) + ((1950/14450) x 439) + ((1800/14450) x 824)
= 431.75
The PC scores are ranked in descending order, and the most deprived PC (which has the largest score) is given a rank of 1 for presentation.
Average of SOA scores
Population weighted average of the combined scores for the SOAs in a PC.
This measure describes the PC as a whole, taking into account the full range of SOA scores across a PC. The advantage of the Average of SOA Score measure is that it describes the SOA by retaining the fact that the more deprived SOA may have more ‘extreme’ scores, which is not revealed to the same extent if the ranks are used. This measure is calculated by averaging the SOA scores in each PC after they have been population weighted. This is calculated in exactly the same way as the Average of SOA Ranks measure, except that the Multiple Deprivation Measure SOA score is used instead of the SOA rank.
Top of document
|
