FOREWORD

In 2009/10 a Cancer Awareness Measure (CAM) showed that 32% of people surveyed could recall a symptom of cancer. Camden ranked third lowest out of the 22 CCGs surveyed. Low screening uptake in Camden was also hindering our ability to diagnose patients with early stage cancer. Breast cancer screening coverage and uptake in Camden were lower than the average during the period 2012 – 2014. Camden residents in the 60-69 years target age group consistently have lower coverage and uptake for bowel cancer screening than for England as a whole and rank low amongst London CCGs. In addition, approximately a fifth of Camden cancer patients presented as emergencies.

This led to us designing a project to improve our population’s awareness of signs and symptoms of cancer. We also wanted our population to be encouraged to present early to GP surgeries. In addition, we were keen to reduce inequality in Camden. I am thrilled that Community Links took on this challenge. They have demonstrated a significant positive impact on knowledge of signs and symptoms of cancer in the Camden population. The number of people who recognise all key symptoms of cancer has increased from 35% to 78%. They have also made it clear to these people when to visit their doctor. Before the intervention 59% of men would wait one week or less to see their GP when they found a significant symptom; after the intervention 84% would attend in that time frame. Finally, they have demonstrated a significant reduction in inequality. For example, people outreached in the more deprived wards were less likely to be aware of the early signs and symptoms of cancer, compared to those in less deprived wards. This inequality disappears by the end.

I would like to thank Community Links for their hard work.

Imogen

Imogen Staveley

GP Prince of Wales Medical Centre, Camden Clinical Commissioning Group Cancer Clinical Lead FOREWORD

Raising awareness of possible cancer signs and symptoms, of the need for regular breast self- examination, of the importance of going quickly to a GP with any concerns and of the cancer screening programmes is vital if we are to reduce health inequalities and save lives. People are dying from lack of knowledge and lack of confidence. This can be tackled. A community organisation, such as Community Links, is ideally placed to deliver programmes that promote confidence and awareness.

When I detected my breast cancer, I knew that a lump was a symptom and that I should go to the GP right away. Not only did these tiny nuggets of information save my life but they also helped me catch my cancer very early and therefore require less invasive treatment.

Community Links has worked in many different contexts sharing cancer information and we have always found that local people take it very seriously, they value the concern that is shown for their health and promise to pass on the information to their loved ones and friends. Within this programme we have monitored our impact using the Cancer Awareness Measure, it is clear that people do retain the information and that their behaviour is positively influenced.

We would like to thank Camden CCG for their commitment and support.

Frances Clarke

Community Links Head of Programmes

Direct: 0207 473 9642 | Switchboard: 0207 473 2270 [email protected]

References: Analysis of One Year Cancer Survival Rates NHS Camden CCG Profile. Transforming Cancer Services Team. March 2016. COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN Contents

• What did we learn 1

• The Community Links approach 2

• Summary of impact 3

• Main findings from the Cancer Awareness Measure (CAM) 4

• Programme delivery 5

a. Key community locations 6

b. Communications organisations and centres 7

c. Faith groups 9

d. Sheltered accommodation and retirement homes 10

e. Schools and universities 11

f. Vunerable people and carers 12

g. Staff training 13

• Innovative use of resources 14

• People reached 16

• Impact of the campaign 18

• Findings from the Cancer Awareness Measurement 18

1. Awareness of the signs and symptoms of cancer 18

2. Confidence in recognising the early signs and symptoms of cancer 20

3. Increased awareness of the risk factors associated with cancer 21

4. Increased awareness of NHS screening programmes 22

5. Speed with which people would see a GP about potential cancer symptoms 23

• Appendices 25 COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN 1

What did we learn?

1. We found that the rigorous collection and analysis of Cancer Awareness Measure (CAM) data revealed not only the overall positive impact of the programme on levels of knowledge and behavioural intentions but also provided insights into its impact on tackling inequalities. This CAM information enabled us to tailor our outreach approaches in order to address particular deficits.

2. We learnt from our conversations with local people and from the CAM data that the barriers to early detection are very varied and that the way to tackle this variety is through directly talking to people. Mainstream health messages are unlikely to reach people equally, we have found that these messages can penetrate diverse areas and areas of social deprivation if they are delivered in person. Our model of delivery demonstrates that this approach can be standardised and its impact can be evaluated.

3. The importance of recruiting a flexible team who bring not only appropriate languages and cultural knowledge, but also a range of local community contacts and suggestions for appropriate outreach locations which enabled us to reach deeper into communities.

4. The value of a combined approach which focussed both on directly reaching our target group and on providing training for volunteers and professionals who would help to identify barriers and health risks for particular communities and who would be able to continue to provide ongoing early diagnosis support in a range of settings be that in a GP practice, community centre, homeless hostel, day centre or sheltered housing scheme. 2 COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN

The Community Links approach

Community Links was commissioned and extensive cultural knowledge. A by Camden CCG to deliver the ‘small sessional team is a flexible workforce c’ cancer awareness campaign in capable of delivering sessions at a the borough. The ‘small c’ message range of times and locations. These stresses that if cancer is caught early local workers brought with them it is much more likely to be survived knowledge of the area and a range and the treatments required are of local contacts, knowledge which likely to be less severe. Implicit is helped to develop the outreach the intention to bring cancer down programme. to size, to try to overcome the debilitating fear that it can induce We employed a project officer who and to empower people to take more had worked on the previous ‘small c’ control over their own health and campaign in Camden, enabling us to to be confident to seek help if they build upon that work and experience. identify concerns. This group of staff was supplemented by volunteers, including students Community Links is ideally placed (UCL and Middlesex University), to deliver this type of programme; sixth formers, cancer survivors, we have 40 years’ experience of pharmacists and other interested addressing the complex cultural, local people. We brought together religious, economic, generational and trained a highly committed team and gender experience of distinct who realised the importance of their communities and of working work in potentially saving people’s creatively with those communities to lives. inform and empower.

Crucial to our approach is the belief that a broad range of local people should play a role in the development and delivery of the programme. We began by recruiting a team of part-time and sessional workers who reflected the local community. We have found that communicating with an audience, in a group or one-to-one, is more effective if delivered by someone like themselves. Recognition builds trust, enabling meaningful conversations to take place. Our sessional team offers 25 languages COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN 3

Summary of impact

We reached 6847 people, out of which 3501 were aged over 50. We assessed our impact through the nationally accredited Cancer Awareness Measure (CAM); our target was 10% of the over 50s who we engaged with to complete a CAM before and after our intervention. In order to achieve the target of 350(10%) post-CAMs we knew from experience that we needed 500 pre-Cams.

We found that in all categories knowledge and confidence rose after our interventions and that these increases also involved a reduction in inequalities within the target group of the over 50s. Analysis of pre- and post- CAMs show various types and degrees of inequalities between categories of Camden resident which are reduced after our targeted and bespoke intervention.

Cancer Awareness Measure (CAM) CAMS completed CAMS completed before intervention after intervention Gender Male 200 133 Female 283 206 Other 1 0 Prefer not to say 16 11 Total 500 350 Deprivation at More deprived than 362 266 ward level London average As deprived or less 121 78 deprived than London Other 17 6 Total 500 350 Ethnicity White British 227 159 White Other 109 80 Black/Black British 29 20 Bengali 31 19 Other Asian/Asian Brit- 52 38 ish Other 24 15 Prefer not to say 28 19 Total 500 350 4 COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN

Main findings from the Cancer Awareness Measure (CAM):

1. Awareness of the signs and 3. Increased awareness of the risk symptoms of cancer factors associated with cancer Overall, there is a marked increase in Those people who recognised four risk the knowledge of signs and symptoms factors or less fell from 34% to 10%. of cancer in people who took part In pre-CAMS, 43% believed cancer is in our activities. Those people who unrelated to age and in post-CAMS, recognised three symptoms or less fell this dropped to 27%. from 29.60% to 7.14%. 4. Increased awareness of NHS Pre-CAMS revealed a high level of cancer screening programmes inequality between ethnic groups in Those aware of breast screening rose knowledge of signs of symptoms which from 77.6% to 90%, aware of bowel disappeared in the post-CAMS. screening rose from 70% to 85.7% and People outreached in wards at least of cervical rose from 69.7% to 82.5%. as deprived as the London average In the pre-CAMS women were more were less likely, in pre-CAMS, to be aware of bowel screening than men. aware of the early signs and symptoms This discrepancy disappears in the of cancer, compared with people in post-CAMS. less deprived wards. This discrepancy disappears in post-CAMS. 5. Speed with which people would see a GP about potential cancer 2. Confidence to recognise the early symptoms signs and symptoms of cancer In pre-CAMs 66.80% people said they Respondents’ confidence in would see a GP within a week about recognising the early signs and possible signs and symptoms of cancer, symptoms of cancer has measurably this rose to 84% post-CAMs and only increased. Those people who were 4.5% said they would leave it as long somewhat confident or very confident as one month. rose from 47.60% to 83.14%. In pre-CAMS, men are less likely than In pre-CAMS, Bengali, White Other and women to say they would see a GP Black British respondents are the least within a week; in post-CAMS this likely to feel confident to recognise inequality disappears. In pre-CAMS, possible signs and symptoms, these white respondents, and especially non- inequalities are reduced in the post- British White people (which included CAM. They are also the groups who a large Irish community) are less likely most improved their knowledge of than BME respondents to say they signs and symptoms of cancer in would see a GP within a week; these the post-CAMS: as their awareness inequalities are reduced in post-CAMS. improved, so did their confidence. COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN 5

Programme delivery

This programme has focussed on further support. Those identified promoting the early diagnosis groups included Asian people, of cancer by raising awareness particularly Bengalis, Irish and LGBT amongst the local population communities, as well as vulnerable of Camden. We have sought to groups such as the homeless and address the issues which deter local those living with addiction, physical people from detecting cancer in and/or learning disabilities. its early stages. We have focussed on increasing knowledge of the We adopted a multi-pronged possible signs and symptoms of outreach approach: firstly seeking the main cancers, primarily breast, to reach our target groups at key lung and bowel; reluctance or lack community locations, secondly of knowledge of the value of taking working with and through community part in the national cancer screening groups and faith groups, thirdly programmes; low levels of breast self- working within sheltered and examination and reluctance or lack retirement housing schemes, of awareness of the need to go to fourthly working with schools and the GP quickly with any concerns and universities and lastly targeting knowledge of risk factors. particularly vulnerable people and their carers. In all these settings we Our target group was people of 50 were aware of the opportunities and over and we sought to ensure for providing training to staff and that we paid particular attention volunteers in order to enable them to reaching groups who had been to provide ongoing cancer awareness identified previously as needing information and support.

Type of event Events Total people 50+ people 1. Key community locations 67 4567 2538 2. Community groups and centres 19 240 214 3. Faith groups 13 610 404

4. Sheltered & retirement housing 14 148 132 schemes 5. Schools and universities 11 1123 118 6. Vulnerable people and their carers 4 118 71 7. Staff training 8 41 24 6 COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN

A. Key community locations We engaged with residents within a wide range of community events and festivals, libraries, pharmacies, GP surgeries, pubs, open markets and gyms. We talked about the signs and symptoms of cancer and about how we can reduce our risks through healthy living. Our outreach workers reported that the majority of people we approached were interested and demonstrated an understanding of the information given and its importance.

We found that in-depth conversations could take place in many different settings and that speaking to people in the heart of their local communities helped them to be responsive to the information being shared. In addition to imparting information we offered residents the opportunity to voice their concerns, express their feelings and explore their misconceptions. We found that although some residents felt confident to recognise the signs and symptoms of cancer, there were gaps in their knowledge and they did have some misconceptions, such as the idea that people who don’t experience any signs or symptoms do not need to attend screening; or that people who don’t smoke and/or who avoid processed foods will not get cancer.

Our staff members had branded t-shirts and shoulder bags which helped them to be identified and prompted many useful conversations at events and even in the street.

Our workers engaged with 4,567 people, including 2538 over 50s at 67 key community locations (see appendix A). COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN 7

B. Community organisations and centres

We engaged with community organisations across the borough, offering information in a wide range of formats, including interactive workshops and one-on-one discussions. Group leaders were very positive about our activities, and encouraged us to offer similar events to their colleagues and community partners and thus the programme expanded.

The commissioners had identified Bengali people aged over 50 as a priority group for our cancer awareness information. Hopscotch Asian Women’s Centre and the Bengali Carers’ group at Age UK Great Croft have been important community hubs to involve. Our tailored approach included using Bengali-speaking outreach workers and volunteers, including an experienced community pharmacist. Bengali community leaders were key figures to engage as they receive queries from members of their own communities who have health concerns. 8 COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN

The commissioners had identified Bengali people aged over 50 as a priority group for our cancer awareness information. Hopscotch Asian Women’s Centre and the Bengali Carers’ group at Age UK Great Croft have been important community hubs to involve. Our tailored approach included using Bengali- speaking outreach workers and volunteers, including an experienced community pharmacist. Bengali community leaders were key figures to engage as they receive queries from members of their own communities who have health concerns.

Shamim K., group leader at Hopscotch, has reported having received questions from the Bengali older people she is assisting, regarding the NHS bowel screening kit. Shamim said that taking part in our workshop gave her the necessary knowledge to answer these questions confidently in future.

Discussions with community leaders also offered us valuable insights into the challenges that specific communities face. For instance, although members of the Irish community in Camden demonstrated a relatively good level of awareness of the signs and symptoms of cancer, staff at the London Irish Centre identified a number of risk factors: the traditional Irish diet, heavily eliantr on beef and starchy foods, high rates of smoking among the older generation and socio- cultural barriers to promptly accessing GP services particularly amongst older Irish men, who fear that they may be wasting doctors’ time or that their concerns will not be taken seriously. This information enabled us to address these issues in our presentations and discussions.

“Some of the older people here still remember the days when there were ‘No Blacks, No Irish, No Dogs’ signs in windows… They may feel like they are imposing, if they access NHS services, they don’t want to be seen as a bother to their GP”. Dane B, London Irish Centre employee

When working with the older gay men’s group at Opening Doors, we shared information from the LGBT cancer project. Also, at the participants’ request, we discussed additional cancers and covered the potential signs and symptoms of prostate cancer, and the PSA test. We also covered male breast cancer when we read and discussed a passage from “Healing Within: My Journey with Breast Cancer”, a memoir by American gay author Michael W. Kovarik. COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN 9

Working with a women’s group at the Camden Cypriot Women’s Association, we had in-depth discussions about breast awareness and breast cancer screening. We also discussed diet as a cancer risk factor in relation to traditional Greek Cypriot eating habits: eating processed meats for breakfast and drinking digestive spirits after meals.

Our workers engaged with 240 people including 214 over 50s within 19 community organisations and centres (see appendix B).

C. Faith groups

We engaged with worshippers our target group and passing on our in churches and mosques after cancer awareness messages. religious services and at religious events. We gave presentations to Christian and Muslim congregations Our workers spoke with 610 attending religious services and/ people, including 404 over 50s at or church-sponsored social events. 13 faith groups (see appendix C). We were also present at religious festivals, such as the Cromer Street Islamic Mela and the Camden Puja. We worked with a range of faiths including Muslim, Hindu, Church of England, Catholic and Unitarian.

Church and Mosque congregations eagerly welcomed our outreach workers, and included announcements about our work in their religious services. Our volunteer team included a Bengali pharmacist, with significant community outreach experience, who offered a talk in Bengali to a group of men attending a service at the Shah Jalal Mosque in Euston.

Religious organisations also regularly run activities such as lunch clubs, picnics and bingo with their elderly parishioners; these have been excellent occasions for engaging with 10 COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN

D. Sheltered accommodation and retirement homes

Awareness raising sessions in take these car ds to their GP. We sheltered accommodation schemes liaised with scheme managers who, if are an ideal opportunity to reach needed, made GP appointments for older people who might otherwise the residents and assisted them to find it difficult to attend our attend. The staff typically took part in workshops. These residents have our awareness workshops alongside highly diverse needs; they range residents and therefore will be able from active seniors involved in their to provide ongoing support for their communities, who regularly attend residents. social activities to highly vulnerable people at risk of isolation, living with Some sheltered accommodation physical disabilities, mental illness or scheme managers and community addiction. leaders enquired about the availability of audio and braille In order to meet these diverse needs materials for sight-impaired or blind we adopted a tailored approach service users. We provided them which included delivering workshops with audio resources from a variety at coffee mornings and residents of sources, such as the NHS and meetings and offering one-on-one Macmillan Cancer. visits to people’s flats if they found it difficult or preferred not to attend Our workers engaged with 148 group events. Those with significant people including 132 over 50s, mobility issues or vulnerable within 14 sheltered housing and individuals with mental health issues care schemes (see appendix D). were often more comfortable to be visited within their own flats.

Staff working in these sheltered housing schemes were generally very proactive in supporting us to reach residents. Staff referred vulnerable residents to us who had concerns about possible symptoms. We talked to these residents individually emphasising the importance of being seen by a GP and offering reassurance. We also used the ‘small c’ symptom checker cards to record symptoms and advised the users to COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN 11

E. Schools and universities

When working in these settings we Parents’ Evenings. School are seeking to simultaneously give also run an Older People’s Club young people knowledge that will be which is staffed by their 6th form useful to them throughout their lives volunteers. We delivered a cancer whilst also seeking to provide them awareness workshop to the Older with information that they can share People’s Club and we ran training with their older family members and sessions for the 6th form students. older people in the community. We An important complement to this encourage these young people to be work is direct interaction with parents alert to signs and symptoms that their and carers. older relatives may display and also to be alert to the cancer screening Our workers engaged with 258 invitations that relatives may receive, people including 118 over 50s particularly where those relatives do within 7 sessions at Haverstock not read English and may not open School (see Appendix E). their own post.

We organised a university based Pharmacy students’ project lung cancer awareness campaign in Freshers’ Fair Stall UCL campus 175 which we recruited 35 volunteers (stall) to deliver lung cancer awareness Pharmacy students conference & 90 and smoking cessation activities volunteer recruitment at the UCL campus, at Haverstock Haverstock School lunchtime stall 200

School and at community events. UCL campus lung cancer stall 400 90 UCL students attended a ‘study day’ which we organised to raise Total 865 awareness of cancer and the risks of smoking, including shisha. This group included pharmacists and medical students who would go on to use this knowledge in their future roles. We also recruited volunteers from UCL through the Volunteering Society and the Winter Volunteering Fair.

We were enthusiastic to work with The Haverstock School because of its active engagement with the community. We took part in the School’s Celebrating Parents’ and Carers’ Event and at the School’s 12 COMMUNITY LINKS | THE CAMDEN REPORT

Our workers engaged with 118 vulnerable people including 71 over 50s within 9 events (see Appendix F).

F. Vulnerable People and Carers

We sought to further extend the reach of our programme by targeting particularly vulnerable people who were unlikely otherwise to receive these messages; this included homeless people, those living with mental illness, with physical or learning disabilities and with Alzheimer’s/ dementia. We worked directly with vulnerable people and, where appropriate, with their family and professional and voluntary carers.

In order to communicate our messages effectively we designed English ability- appropriate workshops for people with learning disabilities, and held them at the New Shoots Day Centre and at Elfrida Rathbone Camden. These resources included an easy to understand “good for you/ bad for you” activity to raise awareness of how we can decrease our risk of cancer through healthier lifestyles. We visited Netherwood Day Centre, the specialist dementia day centre and took part in the Alzheimer’s Conference, organised by the Chinese National Healthy Living Centre, in order to engage with family carers. We also provided training for the Bluebird Care staff, who provide home visits to people living with dementia. We engaged with homeless people on the street, at the CHIP GP surgery and in surrounding hostels. We offered training to staff in a St Mungo’s homeless hostel and in three care homes for people with mental illnesses and/or dementia.

When working with family and professional carers, our goal was to empower them to recognise possible symptoms of cancer not just in themselves, but also in the vulnerable people they were caring for. We used and distributed the Macmillan Guide to Diagnosis and Treatment for carers of people with learning disabilities, as well as various easy reading materials on breast, bowel and cervical screening that carers could read and use together with the people they were caring for. COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN 13

G. Staff training

We offered training to professionals and volunteers in a range of settings, particularly seeking those who can give ongoing early diagnosis support to others. Training was provided for The Camden Care Navigators – a service which supports patients who are 60+ and have one or more long- term condition. Training was provided for staff in care homes and sheltered accommodation schemes, who often assist residents in tasks such as, making GP appointments and in supporting the resident to attend. We found that community centre staff (particularly those representing minority groups) and sheltered housing scheme managers often deal with queries about things such as breast and bowel screening, or worrying possible symptoms.

Non-clinical staff in GP practices (Health Care Assistants, Receptionists, Practice Managers) are another group who receive queries about cancer screening and possible symptoms. When training non-clinical staff it is useful to consider ways in which the practice can raise cancer awareness and support the uptake of the national screening programmes. In the Gower Street surgery, for example, we focussed training on the bowel screening programme in response to staff requests.

“I think everyone present appreciated your vibrant presentation humanising a difficult topic.” Tracey M. Open House Co-ordinator- Community

During staff training sessions we also gathered valuable insights into the specific challenges various groups face and which assisted us to build tailored approaches. Furthermore, group leaders who received our training supported us to offer similar events to their colleagues and community partners. For instance, after training staff at the St Mungo’s Hostel in St Pancras Way, the manager supported us to contact other hostels.

Our workers engaged with 41 people including 24 over 50s at 8 events (see Appendix G). 14 COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN

Innovative use of resources

We used a range of resources to aid communication and facilitate discussion. ‘Small c’ pens with a pull-out banner containing signs and symptoms proved popular with all audiences, they were a fun, engaging way of passing on information. We used various other resources to make workshops more fun and interactive. For instance, we used ‘breastology bags’ and silicon breasts interactive resources which enable people to learn about self- examination and breast awareness.

Bowel screening kits were used to demonstrate how this test is completed and improve recognition of the kit as many people, including health care professionals, had not seen a bowel kit before. The small c’ symptom checker cards were a useful tool, local people were encouraged to keep them in the case they experienced a symptom in future or in case they noticed a possible symptom in a relative or friend. COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN 15

We very rarely saw these cards dropped on the floor. These cards can aid communication between patients and GPs and can boost patient confidence. The cards can be given to the GP which can help to empower patients to feel that their concerns are legitimate. The symptoms can be ticked which can be particularly valuable for patients with limited English language, with learning disabilities or for those who lack confidence in speaking to their GP. Some Individuals ticked the boxes as we spoke to them and said that they would be taking the card to their GP. Where men in the target group expressed a particular interest in prostate and testicular cancer, materials from Prostate Cancer UK and Orchid Male Cancers were also used alongside ‘The small c’ symptom checker cards. 16 COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN

People reached

We reached 6847 people, out of Total 50+ which 3501 were aged over 50. Men 2990 1581 Women 4552 1920 More women than men attended our activities and engaging with our outreach workers. We did, however, work hard to engage with men aged over 50.

The ethnicity of the people we Total 50+ outreached reflects the diversity White 2733 1862 of the borough. Compared with British Camden’s demographics, Bengali 726 433 and Black people are slightly over- White represented in our sample, due to Other our focus on BME people, who may Bengali 812 369 face language and cultural barriers Other 680 337 to confidently recognising the early Asian signs and symptoms of cancer; and 878 417 accessing GP services promptly. Black Other 153 64

All people 50+

White British

White Other

Bengali

Other Asian

Black

Other COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN 17

We outreached people in most wards of the borough, with a particular focus on those with a higher level of deprivation

Wards Total people Total 50+ Belsize 0 0 167 89 with Primrose Hill 856 469 Cantelowes 286 202 34 26 and Fitzjohns 0 0 217 130 Town 62 55 Haverstock 474 263 42 39 & 280 149 Kentish Town 844 473 Kilburn 672 434 King’s cross 972 515 Regent’s Park 477 276 St Pancras and Somers Town 128 95 12 12 253 148

Total people Total 50+ Wards less deprived than London average 597 394 Wards as deprived as London average 4552 515 Wards more deprived than London 3652 2046 average Wards among most deprived 25% London 800 541

All people 50+

Wards less deprived than London average

Wards as deprived as London average

Wards more deprived than London average

Wards among most deprived 25% London 18 COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN

Impact of the campaign

In order to evaluate the success of our campaign, we used an adapted version of the Cancer Awareness Measure (CAM), a survey instrument designed by Cancer Research UK and Kings College to assess awareness of cancer among the general population. 500 people completed CAMS before our intervention, 350 of these people completed the same survey after the intervention. People who took part in cancer awareness workshops filled in the pre-CAM at the beginning of the talk and the post-CAM at the end of it. People who received one-to-one outreach were contacted (mostly by phone, but in some cases by email or in person) one month after the intervention.

44.57% of post- CAMS were followed straight away and 55.43% were followed up after one month. There are no significant differences between the two groups in relation to relative increases in knowledge of either the signs and symptoms of cancer, or of risk factors associated with it.

Awareness of signs & symptoms, Awareness of risk factors, post-CAMS post-CAMS

120% 120% 100% 100% All 6 All 9 80% 80% 60% 60% 4-5 5-8 40% 40% 20% 20% 3 or less 4 or less 0% 0% Follow up Follow up Follow up Follow up 1-month immediately 1-month immediately Findings from the Cancer Awareness Measurement 1. Awareness of the signs and symptoms of cancer Overall, there is a marked increase in the knowledge of signs and symptoms of cancer in people who took part in our activities.

Number of people who only No. of people who recognise all recognise 3 symptoms or less 6 key symptoms DOWN from 29.60% to 7.14% UP from 43% to 77.7% COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN 19

Recognition of sign/symptom % pre YES % post YES DIFFERENCE Persistent difficulty swallowing 65.80% 90.86% 25.06% Persistent unexplained pain 66.60% 89.14% 22.54% Persistent cough/ hoarseness 69.00% 90.29% 21.29% Unexplained bleeding 74.80% 93.71% 18.91% Unexplained weight loss 74.60% 92.29% 17.69% Lump/swelling 81.40% 94.86% 13.46%

Knowledge of signs & symptoms of cancer improved across all age groups for both men and women.

Pre-CAMS reveal a high level of inequality between ethnic groups in knowledge of signs of symptoms; this disappears in the post-CAMS.

Ethnicity % who could only recognise 3 % who could only recognise 3 symptoms or less PRE CAMS symptoms or less POST CAMS Bengali 61.29% 10.53% Black or Black 41.38% 5.00% British White Other 32.11% 6.25% Other Asian or 38.46% 13.16% Asian British White British 18.50% 5.03%

People outreached in wards at least as deprived as the London average were less likely, in pre-CAMS, to be aware of the early signs and symptoms of cancer, compared with people in less deprived wards. This discrepancy disappears in post- CAMS.

Ward deprivation % who recognise 3 symptoms % who recognise 3 symptoms or less PRE CAMS or less POST CAMS At least as deprived 31.63% 7.28% as London average Less deprived than 19.44% 7.14% London average 20 COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN

2. Confidence in recognising the early signs and symptoms of cancer Respondents’ confidence in recognising the early signs and symptoms of cancer has measurably increased.

pre-CAMS post-CAMS Not at all + not very 44.20% 12.00% confident Somewhat + very 47.60% 83.14% confident

In pre-CAMS, Bengali, White Other and Black British respondents are the least likely to feel confident to recognise possible signs and symptoms, these inequalities are reduced in the post-CAM. They are also the groups who most improved their knowledge of signs and symptoms of cancer in the post-CAMS: as their awareness improved, so did their confidence.

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

Bengali White Black or Other Asian or White Other Black British Asian British British

Difference as a result of intervention

Somewhat or very confident pre-CAM COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN 21

3. Increased awareness of the risk factors associated with cancer

No. of people who recognise 4 No. of people who recognise all risk factors or less 4 risk factors DOWN from 34% to 10% UP from 13% to 43.14%

Knowledge of risk factors associated with cancer increased by up to 34%.

Risk factor % pre YES % post YES DIFFERENCE Insufficient exercise 48.80% 83.14% 34.34% Age 70+ 47.60% 79.43% 34.34% Less than 5/day 42.20% 70.86% 28.66% Red/processed meat 58.80% 85.14% 26.34% Alcohol 53.40% 78.00% 24.60% Overweight 62.00% 83.43% 21.43% Close relative with cancer 64.20% 82.29% 18.09% Passive smoking 80.20% 91.14% 10.94% Smoking 87.00% 95.71% 8.71%

In pre-CAMS, 43% believed cancer is unrelated to age and in post-CAMS, this dropped to 27%. 22 COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN

4. Increased awareness of NHS screening programmes

Awareness of breast screening UP from 77.6% to 90%

Awareness of bowel screening UP from 70% to 85.7%

Awareness of cervical screening UP from 69.7 to 82.5%

Despite the fact that NHS bowel screening is targeting both men and women, and that statistically men are somewhat more at risk of bowel cancer, in pre- CAMS women were more likely to be aware of it than men. This discrepancy disappears in the post-CAMS.

Bowel screening awareness in pre & post CAMS

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% Men Women COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN 23

5. Speed with which people would see a GP about potential cancer symptoms

Compared with pre-CAM respondents, post-CAM respondents are measurably more likely to say that they would see a GP within a week about possible signs and symptoms of cancer.

pre-CAMS post-CAMS 1 week or less 66.80% 84.00%

More than 1 week 28.80% 14.29% Month or more 13.40% 4.57%

In pre-CAMS, men are less likely than women to say they would see a GP within a week; in post-CAMS this inequality disappears.

Insufficient exercise Men Women Age 70+ Pre-CAMS Post-CAMS Pre-CAMS Post-CAMS 1 week or less 59.00% 84.21% 67.49% 84.47% 2-4 weeks 18.00% 12.03% 14.13% 8.74% Month or more 15.50% 3.76% 15.19% 8.74%

Our outreach workers reported that men said that they would feel awkward or embarrassed to speak to a GP about potential symptoms, particularly if they related to the bowel or prostate. Workers felt that having candid discussions about these feelings and having concerns listened to may have contributed to the change in attitude.

In pre-CAMS, white respondents, and especially non-British White people (including the large Irish community in Camden) were less likely than BME respondents to say they would see a GP within a week; these inequalities are reduced in post-CAMS. 24 COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN

Anecdotal evidence from discussions with residents and community members suggests that older Irish residents may put off seeing a GP because of past experience of discrimination or feeling dismissed; and not wanting to be “a burden” on the NHS or their local surgery.

Waits no longer than 1 week to see GP

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% White White Black Other Asian Bengali Other British or Black or Asian British British

Would see a PG within a week PRE

Would see a PG within a week POST COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN 25

APPENDIX A

Appendix A

People outreached

Other Other White British White British White Other White Other Bengali Asian Other Asian Other Black Key Community Locations Ward Deprivation level Bengali Men Black Men Ethnicities Ethnicities TOTAL Women Men Women Men Women Women Men Women TOTAL Women Men 50+ >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 Camden Town & Higher than London 27 58 18 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 19 2 12 4 7 0 13 0 2 183 54 Camden Town Boots Primrose Hill average

Most deprived 25% Kilburn 10 11 14 3 2 1 3 2 1 0 1 0 3 6 6 13 3 18 15 23 0 0 3 1 139 61 London Higher than London Regent's Park 035200 0 000140 2000003000020 6 Euston- Drummond Street area average Higher than London Regent's Park 9812857 1 212215 3043645110090 43 average Lower than London West Hampstead 57 35 24 18 6 4 1 3 0 3 2 4 2 6 4 10 7 10 1 3 0 2 0 1 203 104 Jester Festival Hampstead average Most deprived 25% Kilburn 785101 4 212001 1041201000041 19 Abbey Rd Surgery London Camden Town & Higher than London 23 15 14 7 5 2 4 5 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 4 1 5 2 5 2 0 0 0 104 57 Castlehaven 30Festival Primrose Hill average Approx. London King's Cross 22 22 9 12 5 4 1 0 17 28 18 26 5 14 8 23 5 12 5 0 0 3 1 0 240 96 Camden Mela average Camden New Town Community Camden Town & Higher than London 20196604 0 200011 1131700000072 29 Festival Primrose Hill average Holborn & Covent Higher than London 212000 0 001001 2211000000114 8 Museum Practice Garden average Peckwater Neighbourhood Higher than London Kentish Town 34 52 17 16 20 10 14 5 13 11 5 7 3 9 6 4 10 8 3 5 0 9 0 0 261 125 Festival average Most deprived 25% Kilburn 341100 0 000002 2231202101025 11 Belsize Practice London Higher than London Kentish Town 25 13 22 7 5 7 3 9 1 8 9 10 8 3 3 7 5 7 11 4 1 0 0 1 169 93 Kentish town average Holborn & Covent Higher than London 41 33 29 11 5 9 4 10 0 9 2 4 7 4 9 5 6 9 2 1 1 2 1 0 204 107 Garden average Approx. London King's Cross 302001 0 102010 0000301000014 5 Coram Fields Festival average Higher than London Kentish Town 25 23 20 4 2 5 1 3 5 2 0 6 3 1 7 6 5 3 6 1 0 0 0 0 128 74 Kentish Town Library average Most deprived 25% Kilburn 49 15 28 8 6 1 4 2 1 5 3 3 5 1 12 4 31 10 24 4 3 2 1 0 222 167 Kilburn High Road London Approx. London King's Cross 28 9 33 24 2 1 4 6 4 5 5 4 2 1 5 3 6 2 6 2 0 0 0 0 152 95 Gray's Inn Road area average Goldington Crescent Gardens- Approx. London King's Cross 11 14 10 8 2 5 1 3 3 5 3 2 0 3 3 2 4 4 3 2 0 0 1 0 89 41 Camden Sentido average Higher than London Regent's Park 29 18 20 5 4 7 2 6 4 6 6 2 3 2 6 3 8 6 9 6 0 0 0 0 152 91 Camden Town Library average Cantelowes Gardens/ Lord Higher than London Cantelowes 52 4 56 29 6 14 10 4 2 3 3 4 5 5 2 1 12 9 7 4 0 0 0 0 232 155 Stanley pub average Talacre Gardens/ Prince of Higher than London Haverstock 42 8 39 5 6 3 3 3 6 12 3 5 4 2 1 3 17 22 0 7 0 0 0 0 191 121 Wales Road average Lower than London Bloomsbury 23 18 17 19 1 2 2 5 12 5 11 9 1 4 1 5 5 7 10 3 1 0 0 0 161 84 Bloomsbury Farmers' Market average Higher than London Regent's Park 300010 0 030009 0101000100019 19 WEP Festival average Higher than London Regent's Park 11 12 14 13 2 6 0 3 12 10 11 8 3 1 2 5 9 11 3 7 0 1 0 3 147 67 Camden Town Library average Approx. London King's Cross 403000 0 001000 0200010000011 10 King's Cross Area average Higher than London Gospel Oak 7013120 6 000400 0201010001038 37 Queen's Crescent Area average Goldington Crescent Gardens - Approx. London King's Cross 20714630 1 201102 1482301100077 48 Camden Sentido average Morrisons pharmacy Chalk Camden Town & Higher than London 17011220 6 021101 0101010000046 43 Farm Primrose Hill average Kingsgate Community Centre - Most deprived 25% Kilburn 1801010 1 010000 0201111000028 26 50+ Exercise Group London Higher than London Regent's Park 303000 1 000000 0000000000077 Camden Town Library average Higher than London Kentish town 3103401 0 000000 0040001000026 6 Kentish Town City Farm average Highgate/Parliament Hill Fields Lower than London Highgate 203020 1 000000 0000000000088 Area average Higher than London Kentish Town 206000 1 000000 0000000000099 Kentish Town Library average Higher than London Kentish Town 102010 1 000000 0000000000055 Kentish Town Library average Most deprived 25% Kilburn 213000 1 100002 0100000000011 9 Kilburn Library London Higher than London Regent's Park 001020 1 000001 0001000000066 Camden Town Library average Holborn & Covent Higher than London 305000 4 010000 2000021002020 17 Holborn Library Garden average Higher than London Regent's Park 205012 1 002000 1000010000015 10 Camden Town Library average Lower than London West Hampstead 2238001 2 000001 0100000000038 34 Hampstead Christmas Market average Lower than London Kentish Town 002000 1 000000 0001000000044 Kentish Town Library average Lower than London Cantelowes 106000 0 000000 0000000000077 The Camden Town Shed average Most deprived 25% Kilburn 525102 1 000001 0000000000017 12 Kilburn Library London Higher than London Gospel Oak 503000 2 010100 0000010000013 13 Queen's Crescent Market average Higher than London Regent's Park 303010 1 000000 0000000000088 Camden Town Library average Higher than London Gospel Oak 203000 1 010001 0101000100011 11 Queen's Crescent Market average Swiss Cottage Community Lower than London Swiss Cottage 601000 0 000000 0401000000012 12 Centre average Holborn & Covent Higher than London 101200 0 000000 0000000000042 Holborn Library Garden average Most deprived 25% Kilburn 302010 3 200000 0000010000012 10 Kilburn Library London Higher than London Kentish town 337001 2 000102 0010221000025 17 Kentish Town Library average Higher than London Kentish town 582403 0 003001 0212325010042 14 Kentish Town Road average Holborn & Covent Higher than London 146002 0 000000 0000001000014 7 Holborn Library Garden average Higher than London Gospel Oak 104010 0 012211 0031400100022 12 Queen's Crescent Library average Higher than London Regent's Park 328215 1 101000 2323323011044 22 Camden Town Library average Holborn & Covent Higher than London 304206 0 201010 0000013000124 8 Holborn Library Garden average Higher than London Regent's Park 222020 0 301011 2042600050134 9 Camden Town Library average Higher than London Gospel Oak 441401 0 101020 2130700000031 6 Queen's Crescent Market average Morrisons Pharmacy Chalk Camden Town & Higher than London 9 8531076 624 41 3 2 1 334382723106 50 Farm Primrose Hill average Lower than London West Hampstead 504200 0 000100 0000000000012 10 West Hampstead Library average Morrisons pharmacy Chalk Camden Town & Higher than London 13 14 26 9 8 7 5 0 2 5 2 4 0 2 2 4 3 7 1 8 4 6 5 4 141 71 Farm Primrose Hill average Lower than London 1113200 1 100000 0100000000020 16 The Armoury Gym Hampstead Town average Most deprived 25% Kilburn 113003 1 004000 1010415000025 6 Kilburn Library London Higher than London Gospel Oak 12 10 7 5 2 7 0 5 0 10 1 2 0 0 1 6 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 74 24 Queen's Crescent Market average Morrissons Pharmacy Chalk Camden Town & Higher than London 1045221 2 030202 1015161230053 39 Farm Primrose Hill average Most deprived 25% Kilburn 6211010 1 204552 2211717000161 30 Kilburn Library London Higher than London Regent's Park 3116120 0 011300 1001682110048 35 Camden Town Library average Morrisons Pharmacy Chalk Camden Town & Higher than London 23420232 5 120405 1304030202086 76 Farm Primrose Hill average Key Community Location by Ethnicity/Age 803 494 658 275 133 145 122 103 104 162 118 119 100 99 121 174 179 238 154 144 25 57 21 19 4567 2538 Key Community Locations by Ethnicity 1297 933 278 225 266 237 199 295 417 298 82 40 4567 2538 26 COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN

APPENDIX B, C, D

Appendix B Appendix B Appendix B People outreached Community Groups & White British White British White Other White Other Bengali People outreachedAsian Other Asian Other Other Ethnicities Other Ethnicities Ward Deprivation level Bengali Men Black Women Black Men TOTAL TOTAL Centres Women Men Women Men Women People outreachedWomen Men Women Men Community Groups & White British White British White Other White Other Bengali Asian Other Asian Other Other Ethnicities Other Ethnicities 50+ Ward Deprivation level Bengali Men Black Women Black Men TOTAL TOTAL CommunityCentres Groups & White>50Women British <50 White >50Men British <50 White >50Women Other <50 White >50Men Other <50 >50BengaliWomen <50 >50 <50Asian >50Women Other <50 Asian >50Men Other <50 >50 <50 >50 <50Other >50Women Ethnicities <50 Other >50 EthnicitiesMen <50 Ward Deprivation level Bengali Men Black Women Black Men TOTAL 50+ Centres Higher than London Women Men Women Men Women Women Men Women Men TOTAL Regent's Park >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 99 Third Age Project average 1 0 1000 00 0000 0 0 502000 0 0 0 0 50+ HigherApprox. than London London >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 Regent'sKing's Cross Park 1799 15 ThirdAge UK Age Great Project Croft Higheraverage than London 1111 0 21001000 00 0000 0 0 002000502000 0 0 0 0 Regent's Park average 99 ThirdAge UKAge Great Project averageApprox. London 1 0 1000 00 0000 0 0 502000 0 0 0 0 King's Cross 1617 1215 Croft/BengaliAge UK Great group Croft Approx.average London 1111 0 21000000 000010410 0000 0 0 002000000000 0 0 0 0 King's Cross average 17 15 AgeAge UKUK GreatGreat Croft averageMostApprox. deprived London 25% 111 2100 00 0000 0 0 002000 0 0 0 0 KilburnKing's Cross 0 0 0000000000 1 0 0 00000 1 0 0 0 1622 12 AgeAbbeyCroft/Bengali UK Community Great group centre Approx.average London 1 0 0000 0010410 0 0 000000 0 0 0 0 King's Cross London 16 12 Croft/Bengali group averageMostApprox. deprived London 25% 1 0 0000 0010410 0 0 000000 0 0 0 0 KilburnKing's Cross 1100 0 20000000000000000000 31 0 0 0000002220 10 0 0 0 2222 20 AbbeyAge UK Community Tavis House centre MostLondon deprived 25% Kilburn average 0 0 0000000000 1 0 0 00000 1 0 0 0 22 AbbeyHolly Lodge Community 50+ Lunch centre LondonLowerApprox. than London London HighgateKing's Cross 1105 0 20000000003110000000 31 0 10 0000002220 0 0 0 0 1222 1120 ClubAge UK Tavis House Approx.average London King's Cross average 110 2000000000 3 0 0 02220 0 0 0 0 22 20 AgeHolly UK Lodge Tavis 50+ House Lunch Hampstead averageLower than London Highgate 65 10 20000000003110000000 01 10 01 0100000000 0 0 0 0 1112 11 9 HollyAgeClub UKLodge Henderson 50+ Lunch Court Loweraverage than London HighgateTown average 5 0 3110000000 1 0 1 00000 0 0 0 0 12 11 Club Hampstead averageHigherLower thanthan LondonLondon Cantelowes 56 01 101416100002000000000 0 10 0 0100000000 0 0 0 0 2811 26 9 LondonAge UK IrishHenderson centre Court HampsteadTown Loweraverage than London average 6 1 2000000000 0 1 0 01000 0 0 0 0 11 9 Age UK Henderson Court Town averageLowerHigher thanthan LondonLondon HighgateCantelowes 5 0 000000000010141610000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 2855 26 HollyLondon Lodge Irish Lunchcentre Club Higheraverage than London Cantelowes average 5 0 10141610000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 28 26 London Irish centre averageLowerMost deprived than London 25% HighgateKilburn 25 0 00100000000000 0 0 0000 0 0 1301000 0 00000 10 0 0 0 1855 18 HollyAbbey Lodge Community Lunch CentreClub Loweraverage than London Highgate London 5 0 0000000000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 55 HollyHighgate Lodge Newtown Lunch Club averageMost deprived 25% Kilburn Lower than London 2 0 0010 0 0 0000 0 0 1301000 1 0 0 0 18 18 CommunityAbbey Community Centre CentreLunch Highgate MostLondon deprived 25% 2 0 4000100000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 77 Highgate Newtown Kilburn average 2 0 0010 0 0 0000 0 0 1301000 1 0 0 0 18 18 AbbeyClub Community Centre LondonLower than London HighgateScotscareCommunity Newtown Euston Centre Lunch Lunch StHighgate Pancras & Most deprived 25% 2 0 4000100000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 77 Loweraverage than London 1 1 2000000000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 43 CommunityClub Centre Lunch Highgate 2 0 4000100000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 77 Somers Town averageLondon ClubScotscare Euston Lunch St Pancras & Most deprived 25% Camden Town Higher than London 1 1 2000000000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 43 ScotscareCastlehavenClub Euston Community Lunch StSomers Pancras Town & MostLondon deprived 25% 4 1 3010000000 0 0 1 01000 0 0 0 0 11 10 & Primrose Hill average 1 1 2000000000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 43 ClubAssociation SomersCamden Town Town LondonHigher than London OpeningCastlehaven Doors Community (older gay Hampstead Lower than London 4 1 3010000000 0 0 1 01000 0 0 0 0 11 10 Camden& Primrose Town Hill Higheraverage than London 0 0 1010 0 3 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 0 0 0 14 13 Castlehavenmen)Association Community 4 1 3010000000 0 0 1 01000 0 0 0 0 11 10 &Town Primrose Hill averageaverage AssociationCamdenOpening DoorsCypriot (older gay Hampstead LowerHigher than than LondonLondon Kentish Town 0 0 1010 00162000000 0 3 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0000000 0 00 0 0 0 0 1814 1613 OpeningWomen'smen) Doors Centre (older gay HampsteadTown Loweraverage than London average 0 0 1010 0 3 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 0 0 0 14 13 men)HopscotchCamden Cypriot (Asian Town averageHigher than London Regent'sKentish Town Park 0 0 000000810000162000000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 1898 16 CamdenWomen)Women's Cypriot Centre Higheraverage than London Kentish Town average 0 0 00162000000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 18 16 Women'sHopscotch Centre (Asian averageHigher than London CantelowesRegent's Park 0 0 00408100000000008100 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 1398 12 HopscotchLondonWomen) Irish (Asian Centre Higheraverage than London Regent's Park average 0 0 0000008100 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 98 Women) averageHigher than London StCantelowes Pancras & Most deprived 25% 0 0 0040810000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 13 12 London Irish Centre Higheraverage than London 5 5 6000000000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 16 11 CantelowesSomers Town London 0 0 0040810000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 13 12 LondonScotsCare Irish Centre St Pancras & averageMost deprived 25% 5 5 6000000000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 16 11 StCamdenSomers Pancras Town Town & MostLondon deprived 25% PrimroseScotsCare Hill Community Higher than London 5 5 6000000000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 1687 11 Somers& Primrose Town Hill London ScotsCareAssociation Camden Town average 6 1 0000 10 0000 0 0 000000 0 0 0 0 Primrose Hill Community Higher than London 87 Camden& Primrose Town Hill PrimroseAssociation Hill Community Higheraverage than London 6 1 0000 10 0000 0 0 000000 0 0 0 087 Community Groups & & Primrose Hill AssociationCentres by average 6 1 0000 10 0000 0 0 000000 0 0 0 0 Community Groups & Ethnicity/Age CommunityCentres by Groups & 65 10 36 3 37 3 19 2 18 5 1 0 5 1 20 0 9 2 2 0 2 0 0 0 240 214 CentresEthnicity/Age by 65 10 36 3 37 3 19 2 18 5 1 0 5 1 20 0 9 2 2 0 2 0 0 0 240 214 Ethnicity/Age 65 10 36 3 37 3 19 2 18 5 1 0 5 1 20 0 9 2 2 0 2 0 0 0 240 214 Community Groups & Centres by Ethnicity Community Groups & 75 39 40 21 23 1 6 20 11 2 2 0 240 214 CommunityCentres by EthnicityGroups & 75 39 40 21 23 1 6 20 11 2 2 0 240 214 Centres by Ethnicity 75 39 40 21 Appendix23 C 1 6 20 11 2 2 0 240 214 Appendix C Appendix C People outreached White British White British White Other White Other Bengali People outreachedAsian Other Asian Other Other Ethnicities Other Ethnicities Faith Groups Ward Deprivation level Bengali Men Black Women Black Men TOTAL TOTAL Women Men Women Men Women People outreachedWomen Men Women Men White British White British White Other White Other Bengali Asian Other Asian Other Other Ethnicities Other Ethnicities 50+ Faith Groups Ward Deprivation level Bengali Men Black Women Black Men TOTAL TOTAL White>50Women British <50 White >50Men British <50 White >50Women Other <50 White >50Men Other <50 >50BengaliWomen <50 >50 <50Asian >50Women Other <50 Asian >50Men Other <50 >50 <50 >50 <50Other >50Women Ethnicities <50 Other >50 EthnicitiesMen <50 Faith Groups Ward Deprivation level Bengali Men Black Women Black Men TOTAL 50+ Islamic Mela Cromer Approx. London Women Men Women Men Women Women Men Women Men TOTAL King's Cross >5013 <50 4 >50 16 <50 6 >50 4 <50 9 >50 4 <50 3 >50 37 <50 54 >50 28 <50 23 >50 11 <50 15 >50 6 <50 12 >50 15<50 9 >50 14 <50 6 >50 0 <50 0 >50 0 <50 0 289 148 Street average 50+ Islamic Mela Cromer HigherApprox. than London London >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 Regent'sKing's Cross Park 136 40 16 4050000000 6 4 9 4 3 37 54 28 23 11 5 15 0 60 12 00000 15 9 14 6 0 0 0 0 28920 148 20 IslamicAllStreet Souls Mela Clubhouse Cromer Approx.average London King's Cross average 13 4 16 6 4 9 4 3 37 54 28 23 11 15 6 12 15 9 14 6 0 0 0 0 289 148 Street averageHigher than London KentishRegent's Town Park 16 20 42100000004050000000 25 20 10 1000000000 10 0 0 0 1720 1020 OurAll Souls Lady ClubhouseChurch Higheraverage than London Regent's Park average 6 0 4050000000 5 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 20 20 All Souls Clubhouse averageHigher than London Kentish Town 2121 2 70543102004210000000 02 2 12 1000001620 10 0 0 0 1758 1041 Our Lady Church Higheraverage than London Kentish Town average 1 2 4210000000 2 2 1 10000 1 0 0 0 17 10 Our Lady Church averageHigher than London Kentish Town 2128 0 705431020000130000000 0 20 02 0001001620 0 0 0 0 2258 2241 Our Lady Church Higheraverage than London Kentish Town average 212 7054310200 0 2 2 01620 0 0 0 0 58 41 Our Lady Church averageMostHigher deprived than London 25% KilburnKentish Town 08 0 0023020000000130000000 0 0 0 0000000010 0 0 0 0 2522 2522 SacredOur Lady Heart Church Church Higheraverage than London Kentish Town London 8 0 00130000000 0 0 0 00010 0 0 0 0 22 22 Our Lady Church averageApprox.Most deprived London 25% King'sKilburn Cross 0 0 000000240100230200000 80 30 50 4000000000 0 0 0 0 2725 1525 CamdenSacred Heart Puja Church MostLondon deprived 25% Kilburn average 0 0 00230200000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 25 25 Sacred Heart Church LondonApprox. London CamdenKing's Cross Town Higher than London 0 0 0000002401 8 3 5 40000 0 0 0 0 27 15 Camden Puja Approx.average London 5 0 2100000000 0 0 1 10100 2 2 0 1 16 10 King's& Primrose Cross Hill average 0 0 0000002401 8 3 5 40000 0 0 0 0 27 15 CamdenSt. Michael's Puja Church Camden Town averageHigher than London Rosslyn Hill Unitarian Higher than London 5 0 2100000000 0 0 1 10100 2 2 0 1 16 10 Camden&Gospel Primrose Oak Town Hill Higheraverage than London 4 0 1140200000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 1 0 13 12 St.Chapel Michael's Church 5 0 2100000000 0 0 1 10100 2 2 0 1 16 10 & Primrose Hill averageaverage St.Rosslyn Michael's Hill UnitarianChurch Higher than London Regent'sGospel Oak Park 04 0 0000000015001140200000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 10 0 1513 1512 RosslynShahChapel Jalal Hill Mosque Unitarian Higheraverage than London Gospel Oak average 4 0 1140200000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 1 0 13 12 ChapelSalvation Army Chalk averageHigher than London Regent'sHaverstock Park 0 0 000000001500 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 1115 1115 ShahFarm Jalal Mosque Higheraverage than London 8 0 3000 00 0000 0 0 000000 0 0 0 0 Regent's Park 0 0 000000001500 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 15 15 ShahSalvation Jalal Army Mosque Chalk St Pancras & averageMostHigher deprived than London 25% Haverstock 1149 1137 SalvationSomersFarm Town Army Mosque Chalk Higheraverage than London 85 0 30008000 00 0000131570 0 0 000000011071 0 0 0 0 HaverstockSomers Town London 11 11 Farm St Pancras & averageMost deprived 25% 8 0 3000 00 0000 0 0 000000 0 0 0 0 4849 3837 Somers Town Mosque StSomers Pancras Town & MostLondon deprived 25% 05 0 50308000 3000 131875131570 0 200010011071 0 0 0 0 Somers Town London 49 37 Somers Town Mosque SomersSt Pancras Town & LondonMost deprived 25% 5 0 8000 00 131570 0 011071 0 0 0 0 Faith Groups by 48 38 Somers Town Mosque StSomers Pancras Town & MostLondon deprived 25% 0 0 5030 30 131875 0 200010 0 0 0 0 Ethnicity/Age 48 38 SomersFaith Groups Town Mosqueby Somers Town London 710 8 0 50 5030 10 58 13 14 30 4 41 131875 66 76 38 31 22 0 17 200010 19 17 16 25 7 3 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 610 404 FaithFaithEthnicity/Age GroupsGroups byby 71 8 50 10 58 13 14 4 41 66 76 38 31 22 17 19 17 16 25 7 3 2 1 1 610 404 Ethnicity/AgeEthnicity 71 8 50 10 58 13 14 4 41 66 76 38 31 22 17 19 17 16 25 7 3 2 1 1 610 404 Faith Groups by 79 60 71 18 107 114 53 36 33 32 5 2 610 404 FaithEthnicity Groups by 79 60 71 18 107 114 53 36 33 32 5 2 610 404 Ethnicity 79 60 71 18 Appendix107 D 114 53 36 33 32 5 2 610 404 Appendix D Appendix D People outreached White British White British White Other White Other Bengali People outreachedAsian Other Asian Other Other Ethnicities Other Ethnicities Sheltered Housing Ward Deprivation level Bengali Men Black Women Black Men TOTAL Women Men Women Men Women People outreachedWomen Men Women Men TOTAL White British White British White Other White Other Bengali Asian Other Asian Other Other Ethnicities Other Ethnicities 50+ Sheltered Housing Ward Deprivation level Bengali Men Black Women Black Men TOTAL White>50Women British <50 White >50Men British <50 White >50Women Other <50 White >50Men Other <50 >50BengaliWomen <50 >50 <50Asian >50Women Other <50 Asian >50Men Other <50 >50 <50 >50 <50Other >50Women Ethnicities <50 Other >50 EthnicitiesMen <50 TOTAL Sheltered Housing Ward Deprivation level Bengali Men Black Women Black Men TOTAL Women Men Women Men Women Women Men Women Men TOTAL50+ Greenwood Osney Higher than London Kentish Town >501 <50 0 >50 3000300000 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 1 <50 0 >50 1 <50 01000 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 0 <50 0 >50 0 <50 0 1050+ 10 Sheltered Housing average >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 Greenwood Osney Higher than London Kentish Town 1 0 10003000003000300000 01 0 21 0000001000 0 0 0 0 1077 10 GreenwoodSheltered Housing Osney Higheraverage than London Kentish Town average 1 0 3000300000 1 0 1 01000 0 0 0 0 10 10 ShelteredGreenwood Housing Osney averageHigher than London Kentish Town Higher than London 1 0 1000300000 0 0 2 00000 0 0 0 0 77 GreenwoodShelteredAshdown CrescentHousing Osney Gospel Oak Higheraverage than London 5 0 4010100000 1 0 0 00020 0 0 1 0 15 15 Kentish Town average 1 0 1000300000 0 0 2 00000 0 0 0 0 77 ShelteredSheltered HousingAccomodation averageHigher than London MakepeaceAshdown Crescent Avenue Gospel Oak Lower than London 5 0 4010100000 1 0 0 00020 0 0 1 0 15 15 Highgate Higheraverage than London 0 0 1010200000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 44 AshdownSheltered Crescent HousingAccomodation Gospel Oak 5 0 4010100000 1 0 0 00020 0 0 1 0 15 15 averageaverage ShelteredSycamoreMakepeace Accomodation Community Avenue MostLower deprived than London 25% KilburnHighgate 50 0 20200000001010200000 0 0 20 00000 0 0 0 0 1144 11 MakepeaceHallSheltered Housing Avenue Loweraverage than London Highgate London 0 0 1010200000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 44 ShelteredSageSycamore Way Housing CommunitySheltered averageApprox.Most deprived London 25% King'sKilburn Cross 35 10 31000000002020000000 0 0 02 0011100000 10 0 0 0 1211 11 8 SycamoreHousingHall Community MostLondon deprived 25% Kilburn average 5 0 2020000000 0 0 2 00000 0 0 0 0 11 11 HallKingsgateSage Way RoadSheltered Sheltered LondonMostApprox. deprived London 25% KilburnKing's Cross 13 01 20100000003100000000 0 0 0 0200000111 1 10 0 0 1287 8 SageHousing Way Sheltered Approx.average London King's Cross London 3 1 3100000000 0 0 0 00111 1 0 0 0 12 8 HousingKingsgate Road Sheltered averageMost deprived 25% KilburnCamden Town Higher than London 1 0 2010000000 0 0 0 02000 1 1 0 0 87 KingsgateHousingOldfield Estate Road Sheltered MostLondon deprived 25% 7 0 9311100000 1 0 2 02300 0 0 0 0 30 23 Kilburn& Primrose Hill average 1 0 2010000000 0 0 0 02000 1 1 0 0 87 Housing Camden Town LondonHigher than London PhilipOldfield House Estate Sheltered Most deprived 25% 7 0 9311100000 1 0 2 02300 0 0 0 0 30 23 CamdenKilburn& Primrose Town Hill Higheraverage than London 3 0 1020000000 1 0 0 00100 2 0 0 0 10 9 OldfieldHousing Estate 7 0 9311100000 1 0 2 02300 0 0 0 0 30 23 & Primrose Hill averageLondon Philip House Sheltered Hampstead LowerMost deprived than London 25% Kilburn 3 0 1020000000 1 0 0 00100 2 0 0 0 1088 9 PhilipArgentaHousing House House Sheltered MostLondon deprived 25% 6 0 2000 00 0000 0 0 000000 0 0 0 0 KilburnTown average 3 0 1020000000 1 0 0 00100 2 0 0 0 10 9 Housing Hampstead LondonLowerHigher than than London London Haverstock 1488 13 ArgentaDenton TowerHouse HampsteadTown Loweraverage than London 1006 0 30002000 00 0000 0 0 000001000000 0 0 0 0 average 88 Argenta House TownHampstead averageLowerHigher than than London London 6 0 2000 00 0000 0 0 000000 0 0 0 0 Haverstock 1499 13 MonroDenton House Tower Higheraverage than London 1004 0 30103000 00 0000 0 0 000010000001 0 0 0 0 HaverstockTown 14 13 DentonLauriston Tower Lodge/ Barlow Hampstead averageLower than London 100 3000 00 0000 0 0 000001 0 0 0 0 Fortune Green 4399 Monrord House HampsteadTown Loweraverage than London 24 0 00003010 00 10010000 0 0 000000000010 0 0 0 0 99 MonroLauriston House Lodge/ Barlow Town averageLower than London 4 0 3010 00 0000 0 0 000010 0 0 0 0 Fortune Green 6543 LauristonLauristonrd Lodge/Lodge Barlow Loweraverage than London 12 0 00210000 1000 00001001 0 0 100000000000 0 0 0 0 Fortune Green 43 rd averageLower than London Fortune Green 2 0 0000 00 1001 0 0 000000 0 0 0 065 Lauriston Lodge Loweraverage than London 1 0 0021 10 0000 0 0 100000 0 0 0 0 Fortune Green 65 LauristonSheltered Lodge Housing by average 1 0 0021 10 0000 0 0 100000 0 0 0 0 Ethnicity/Age Sheltered Housing by 49 1 34 4 11 2 11 0 1 0 0 1 4 0 8 0 5 5 4 2 4 1 1 0 148 132 ShelteredEthnicity/Age Housing by 49 1 34 4 11 2 11 0 1 0 0 1 4 0 8 0 5 5 4 2 4 1 1 0 148 132 Sheltered Housing by Ethnicity/Age 49 1 34 4 11 2 11 0 1 0 0 1 4 0 8 0 5 5 4 2 4 1 1 0 148 132 Ethnicity Sheltered Housing by 50 38 13 11 1 1 4 8 10 6 51148 132 ShelteredEthnicity Housing by 50 38 13 11 1 1 4 8 10 6 51148 132 Ethnicity 50 38 13 11 1 1 4 8 10 6 51148 132 COMMUNITY LINKS | BEATING CANCER IN CAMDEN 27

APPENDIX E, F, G

Appendix E Appendix E

People outreached People outreached Other Other Schools & White British White British White Other White Other Bengali Asian Other Asian Other Black Other Other Schools & Ward Deprivation level White British White British White Other White Other Bengali Bengali Men Asian Other Asian Other Black Black Men EthnicitiesOther EthnicitiesOther TOTAL Schools & Ward Deprivation level WhiteWomen British WhiteMen British WhiteWomen Other WhiteMen Other WomenBengali Bengali Men AsianWomen Other AsianMen Other WomenBlack Black Men Ethnicities Ethnicities TOTAL TOTAL Universities Ward Deprivation level Women Men Women Men Women Bengali Men Women Men Women Black Men Ethnicities Ethnicities TOTAL TOTAL Universities Women Men Women Men Women Women Men Women Women Men TOTAL50+ Women Men 50+ >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 50+ >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 Haverstock School Higher than London Haverstock School Haverstock Higher than London 252 1 0 3 0 0 1010 0 0 0101100 0 00 0 36 31 50+Haverstock Group School Haverstock Higheraverage than London 252 1 0 3 0 0 1010 0 0 0101100 0 00 0 36 31 50+ Group Haverstock average 252 1 0 3 0 0 1010 0 0 0101100 0 00 0 36 31 Haverstock50+ Group School Higheraverage than London Haverstock School Haverstock Higher than London 4 3 0 1 1 4 1 0000 4 0 0100200 1 00 0 22 8 Parents'Haverstock Evening School Haverstock Higheraverage than London 4 3 0 1 1 4 1 0000 4 0 0100200 1 00 0 22 8 Parents' Evening Haverstock average 4 3 0 1 1 4 1 0000 4 0 0100200 1 00 0 22 8 HaverstockParents' Evening School Higheraverage than London Haverstock School Haverstock Higher than London 2 9 1 1 0 0 1 1151 1 0 4261514 0 10 0 47 10 Parents'Haverstock Evening School Haverstock Higheraverage than London 2 9 1 1 0 0 1 1151 1 0 4261514 0 10 0 47 10 Parents' Evening Haverstock average 2 9 1 1 0 0 1 1151 1 0 4261514 0 10 0 47 10 Parents' Evening Higheraverage than London Haverstock Higher than London 3 6 0 2 2 0 1 0675 2 1 3004513 0 00 0 51 23 Haverstock School Haverstock Higheraverage than London 3 6 0 2 2 0 1 0675 2 1 3004513 0 00 0 51 23 Haverstock School Haverstock average 3 6 0 2 2 0 1 0675 2 1 3004513 0 00 0 51 23 Haverstock School Loweraverage than London Haverstock Lower than London 3 0 0 1 3 1 3 0101 0 1 0101000 0 00 0 16 14 Haverstock School Haverstock Loweraverage than London 3 0 0 1 3 1 3 0101 0 1 0101000 0 00 0 16 14 Haverstock School Haverstock average 3 0 0 1 3 1 3 0101 0 1 0101000 0 00 0 16 14 Haverstock School Higheraverage than London Haverstock Higher than London 5 5 4 0 1 6 1 01074 3 1 0231711 1 20 0 65 31 Haverstock School Haverstock Higheraverage than London 5 5 4 0 1 6 1 01074 3 1 0231711 1 20 0 65 31 Haverstock School Haverstock average 5 5 4 0 1 6 1 01074 3 1 0231711 1 20 0 65 31 Haverstock School Higheraverage than London Haverstock Higher than London 1 6 0 7 0 0 0 0020 0 0 0000203 0 00 0 21 1 Haverstock School Haverstock average 1 6 0 7 0 0 0 0020 0 0 0000203 0 00 0 21 1 Haverstock School average Schools & UniversitiesSchools & by Universities by Ethnicity/Age 43 31 6 12 10 11 7 2 18 22 11 10 3 7 7 9 8 22 3 11 2 3 0 0 258 118 Ethnicity/Age 43 31 6 12 10 11 7 2 18 22 11 10 3 7 7 9 8 22 3 11 2 3 0 0 258 118 Schools & UniversitiesSchools & by Universities by Ethnicity 74 18 21 9 40 21 10 16 30 14 50258 118 Ethnicity 74 18 21 9 40 21 10 16 30 14 50258 118 Appendix F Appendix F People outreached People outreached Vulnerable People & White British White British White Other White Other Bengali People outreachedAsian Other Asian Other Black Other Other Vulnerable People & Ward Deprivation level White British White British White Other White Other Bengali Bengali Men Asian Other Asian Other Black Black Men Other Other TOTAL TOTAL VulnerableCarers People & Ward Deprivation level WhiteWomen British WhiteMen British WhiteWomen Other WhiteMen Other WomenBengali Bengali Men AsianWomen Other AsianMen Other WomenBlack Black Men EthnicitiesOther EthnicitiesOther TOTAL TOTAL Carers Ward Deprivation level Women Men Women Men Women Bengali Men Women Men Women Black Men Ethnicities Ethnicities TOTAL TOTAL50+ Carers >50Women<50 >50Men<50 >50Women<50 >50Men<50 >50Women<50 >50 <50 >50Women<50 >50Men<50 >50Women<50 >50 <50 Ethnicities>50 <50 Ethnicities>50 <50 50+ >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 50+ CHIP Surgery for Higher than London >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 CHIP Surgery for Regent's Park Higher than London 15 8 homelessCHIP Surgery people for Regent's Park Higheraverage than London 1 2 5 0 1 2 10 000 0 010 0000 1 00 0 115 8 homeless people Regent's Park average 1 2 5 0 1 2 10 000 0 010 0000 1 00 0 115 8 Burghleyhomeless Road people Care Higheraverage than London 1 2 5 0 1 2 10 000 0 010 0000 1 00 0 1 Burghley Road Care Kentish Town Higher than London 2 0 5 1 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0000000 0 00 0 87 HomeBurghley Road Care Kentish Town Higheraverage than London 2 0 5 1 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0000000 0 00 0 87 Home Kentish Town average 2 0 5 1 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0000000 0 00 0 87 Home Westminster average Westminster CNHLC Conference (Camden-basedWestminster N/A 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1000 0 133311110 0 00 0 25 19 CNHLC Conference (Camden-based N/A 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1000 0 133311110 0 00 0 25 19 CNHLCChina Exchange Conference org)(Camden-based N/A 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1000 0 133311110 0 00 0 25 19 China Exchange org) People'sChina Exchange Centre for org) People's Centre for Lower than London ChangePeople's (learning Centre for Fortune Green Lower than London 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0001000 2 10 0 87 Change (learning Fortune Green averageLower than London 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0001000 2 10 0 87 disabilities)Change (learning Fortune Green average 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0001000 2 10 0 87 disabilities) average Stdisabilities) Mungo's St St Pancras & Most deprived 25% St Mungo's St St Pancras & Most deprived 25% 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0000100 0 00 0 63 PancrasSt Mungo's St SomersSt Pancras Town & LondonMost deprived 25% 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0000100 0 00 0 63 Pancras Somers Town London 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0000100 0 00 0 63 NewPancras Shoots Day Somers Town LowerLondon than London New Shoots Day Fortune Green Lower than London 6 0 4 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 1011200 0 00 1 16 11 CentreNew Shoots Day Fortune Green Loweraverage than London 6 0 4 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 1011200 0 00 1 16 11 Centre Fortune Green average 6 0 4 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 1011200 0 00 1 16 11 NetherwoodCentre Day average Netherwood Day Most deprived 25% CentreNetherwood - Dementia Day Kilburn Most deprived 25% 5 3 4 1 0 0 0 0000 0 0 1011000 1 00 0 17 11 Centre - Dementia Kilburn LondonMost deprived 25% 5 3 4 1 0 0 0 0000 0 0 1011000 1 00 0 17 11 CarersCentre - Dementia Kilburn London 5 3 4 1 0 0 0 0000 0 0 1011000 1 00 0 17 11 Carers London ElfridaCarers Rathbone Higher than London Elfrida Rathbone Kentish Town Higher than London 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0000 0 0 1000003 1 10 1 17 1 CamdenElfrida Rathbone Kentish Town Higheraverage than London 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0000 0 0 1000003 1 10 1 17 1 Camden Kentish Town average 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0000 0 0 1000003 1 10 1 17 1 HighgteCamden Newtown average Highgte Newtown Lower than London CommunityHighgte Newtown Centre Lower than London Community Centre Highgate Lower than London 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0000 0 0 0000000 0 01 0 64 Community Centre Highgate average 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0000 0 0 0000000 0 01 0 64 (disabled adults) average (disabled adults) Vulnerable People & CarersVulnerable by People & Carers by Ethnicity/Age 18 11 23 9 2 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 13 7 3 3 4 4 1 4 4 2 1 3 118 71 Ethnicity/Age 18 11 23 9 2 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 13 7 3 3 4 4 1 4 4 2 1 3 118 71 Vulnerable People & Vulnerable People & Carers by Ethnicity 29 32 5 3 0 0 20 685 6 4118 71 Carers by Ethnicity 29 32 5 3 0 0 20 685 6 4118 71 Appendix G Appendix G People outreached People outreached People outreached Other Other White British White British White Other White Other Bengali Asian Other Asian Other Black Other Other Staff Training Ward Deprivation level White British White British White Other White Other Bengali Bengali Men Asian Other Asian Other Black Black Men EthnicitiesOther EthnicitiesOther TOTAL TOTAL Staff Training Ward Deprivation level WhiteWomen British WhiteMen British WhiteWomen Other WhiteMen Other WomenBengali Bengali Men AsianWomen Other AsianMen Other WomenBlack Black Men Ethnicities Ethnicities TOTAL TOTAL Staff Training Ward Deprivation level Women Men Women Men Women Bengali Men Women Men Women Black Men EthnicitiesWomen EthnicitiesMen TOTAL TOTAL50+ Women Men Women Men Women Women Men Women Women Men 50+ >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50Women <50 >50Men <50 50+ >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 Lower than London >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 >50 <50 Bloomsbury Lower than London 65 Gower Street Surgery Bloomsbury Loweraverage than London 1 0 0 0 2 0 00 000 0 002 0010 0 00 0 065 Gower Street Surgery Bloomsbury average 1 0 0 0 2 0 00 000 0 002 0010 0 00 0 065 BurghleyGower Street Road Surgery Care Higheraverage than London 1 0 0 0 2 0 00 000 0 002 0010 0 00 0 0 Burghley Road Care Kentish Town Higher than London 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 1 0011000 0 10 0 52 HomeBurghley Road Care Kentish Town Higheraverage than London 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 1 0011000 0 10 0 52 Home Kentish Town average 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 1 0011000 0 10 0 52 Home Higheraverage than London Cantelowes Higher than London 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1000 0 0 0000000 0 00 0 31 London Irish Centre Cantelowes Higheraverage than London 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1000 0 0 0000000 0 00 0 31 London Irish Centre Cantelowes average 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1000 0 0 0000000 0 00 0 31 StLondon Mungo's Irish St Centre St Pancras & Mostaverage deprived 25% St Mungo's St St Pancras & Most deprived 25% 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0003001 0 00 0 53 PancrasSt Mungo's St SomersSt Pancras Town & LondonMost deprived 25% 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0003001 0 00 0 53 Pancras Somers Town London 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0003001 0 00 0 53 CamdenPancras Park Somers Town HigherLondon than London Camden Park Cantelowes Higher than London 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0000200 0 00 0 31 ShelteredCamden Park Housing Cantelowes Higheraverage than London 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0000200 0 00 0 31 Sheltered Housing Cantelowes average 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0000200 0 00 0 31 AshSheltered Court HousingCare Higheraverage than London Ash Court Care Kentish town Higher than London 1 0 1 0 4 0 0 0000 0 1 0102000 0 00 0 10 10 HomeAsh Court Care Kentish town Higheraverage than London 1 0 1 0 4 0 0 0000 0 1 0102000 0 00 0 10 10 Home Kentish town average 1 0 1 0 4 0 0 0000 0 1 0102000 0 00 0 10 10 Home Approx.average London King's Cross Approx. London 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0010 0 0 0010100 0 00 0 62 Care Navigators King's Cross Approx.average London 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0010 0 0 0010100 0 00 0 62 Care Navigators King's Cross average 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0010 0 0 0010100 0 00 0 62 Care Navigators Higheraverage than London Kentish town Higher than London 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0000 0 0 0000100 0 00 0 30 Bluebird Care Kentish town Higheraverage than London 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0000 0 0 0000100 0 00 0 30 Bluebird Care Kentish town average 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0000 0 0 0000100 0 00 0 30 StaffBluebird Training Care by average Staff Training by Ethnicity/Age 5 1 1 2 7 3 0 1010 0 2 0326501 0 100 4124 Ethnicity/Age 5 1 1 2 7 3 0 1010 0 2 0326501 0 100 4124 StaffEthnicity/Age Training by 5 1 1 2 7 3 0 1010 0 2 0326501 0 100 4124 Staff Training by Ethnicity 6 3 10 1 1 0 2 5 11 1 1041 24 Ethnicity 6 3 10 1 1 0 2 5 11 1 1041 24 Beating Cancer in Camden

© Community Links 2017

Community Links 105 Barking road Canning Town London E16 4HQ www.community-links.org Registered Charity Number 1018517

Working in partnership with