Annual State of the District Report 2016
Table of Contents District Summary 2 Our Population 2 Projected Population Increase 5 Life Expectancy at Birth 6 Employment and Labour Supply 7 Out-of-Work Benefits 12 Economic Development 14 Crime and Community Safety 15 Index of Multiple Deprivation 2015 18 East Lindsey Health Profile 24
Annual State of the District Report 2016 District Summary
The District of East Lindsey covers an area of approximately 1,760 square kilometres (681 square miles) and is the second largest non-unitary District in England (9th largest overall)1. Geographically it is bigger than many English counties, being larger than counties such as Surrey, Buckinghamshire and Hertfordshire.
East Lindsey is the 153rd most populous District in England with an estimated population of 137,9002. It is the second most populous District in Lincolnshire after South Kesteven (138,900).
Local government services in the area are provided by Lincolnshire County Council, East Lindsey District Council and 117 town and parish councils/parish groups.
Our Population
Knowing both the population size and demography of an area, and understanding how it is changing, are both important factors for any organisation operating in that area. This is particularly the case for those delivering services to the populace both now and into the future, and also those that need to attract or draw down the right amount of government funding.
The way we live our lives has changed considerably from a time where people tended to be born, live and die in the same area. Nowadays a more mobile population globally, as well as nationally and locally as a result of work or education, means that producing and interpreting population and migration statistics has become increasingly challenging.
According to the Office of National Statistics (ONS) mid-year population estimates for the District in 2015 – the latest available – show the population of East Lindsey is 137,900. The estimated population of the District has increased by over 30% since the estimates were first reported for 1981, however in recent years the estimated population has stabilised (see graph 1).
Graph 1 - Estimated Population in East Lindsey - 1981 to 2015 140,000
135,000
130,000
125,000
120,000
(starts at 100,000) at (starts 115,000 Estimated Population Estimated 110,000
105,000
100,000
1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Source: ONS Mid-Year Population Estimates
1 – Standard Area Measurements – Local Authorities – December 2010 2 – Office of National Statistics Mid-Year Population Estimates 2015
Page 2
Annual State of the District Report 2016 Gender Breakdown
The proportion of males to females across Great Britain averages as 49.3 males to every 50.7 females, meaning the population of females is slightly higher across the country than the population of males. This is matched almost exactly at East Midlands level, but is slightly more pronounced at district level, with the proportion of females being 0.5% higher than at East Midlands level and 0.4% higher than for Great Britain. See table 1 for further detail.
East Lindsey East Midlands Great Britain Table 1 - Male/Female Population Number % % % Male 67,400 48.9% 49.4% 49.3% Female 70,500 51.1% 50.6% 50.7% Source: ONS Mid-Year Population Estimates 2015
Ethnic Breakdown
The population of East Lindsey is predominately white, with 98.4% of the population being classified as white. This is considerably higher than in the East Midlands (84.5%) and England (88.8%). Other ethnic groups are considerably smaller, with the mixed/multiple ethnic group category being the second largest (0.69%). This is in contrast to regional and national levels where the Asian/Asian British category is the second largest with 7.7% and 6.4% of the population respectively compared to 0.53% for East Lindsey.
The ethnic breakdown of the population is further detailed in table 2.
East Lindsey East Midlands England Table 2 - Population By Ethnic Grouping Number % % % White: 134,314 98.40% 84.54% 88.76% English/Welsh/Scottish/Northern Irish/British 131,717 96.50% 78.94% 84.91% Irish 490 0.36% 0.97% 0.63% Gypsy or Traveller 61 0.04% 0.10% 0.07% Other White 2,046 1.50% 4.54% 3.14% Mixed/multiple ethnic group: 937 0.69% 2.23% 1.89% White and Black Caribbean 414 0.30% 0.78% 0.89% White and Black African 87 0.06% 0.30% 0.19% White and Asian 261 0.19% 0.62% 0.48% Other Mixed 175 0.13% 0.53% 0.34% Asian/Asian British: 789 0.58% 7.74% 6.44% Indian 231 0.17% 2.61% 3.71% Pakistani 63 0.05% 2.08% 1.07% Bangladeshi 100 0.07% 0.81% 0.29% Chinese 198 0.15% 0.71% 0.54% Other Asian 197 0.14% 1.53% 0.83% Black/African/Caribbean/Black British: 264 0.19% 3.45% 1.79% African 160 0.12% 1.83% 0.92% Caribbean 75 0.05% 1.10% 0.63% Other Black 29 0.02% 0.52% 0.24% Other Ethnic Group: 97 0.07% 1.02% 0.56% Arab 40 0.03% 0.41% 0.21% Any other ethnic group 57 0.04% 0.61% 0.35% Source: Census 2011
Page 3
Annual State of the District Report 2016 Age Group Breakdown
The District has a disproportionately higher percentage of people of retirement age than at either county, regional or national levels. Over a third of the population of East Lindsey is aged 60 years or older (36.4%), compared to a Great Britain average of 24.4%. At the other end of the age scale there are proportionately fewer young people in the District than at either county, regional or national levels (0 - 14 years category). 14.1% of the population are aged between 0 and 14 years old compared to a Great Britain average of 17.7% (see graph 2).
Graph 2 - Age Group Comparison
30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0%
% of Overall Population Overall %of Aged 0 - 14 years Aged 15 - 29 years Aged 30 - 44 years Aged 45 - 59 years Aged 60 - 74 years Aged 75+ years
East Lindsey Lincolnshire East Midlands Great Britain
Source: ONS Mid-Year Population Estimates 2015
The most populous age bands in East Lindsey (see graph 3) are those aged between 60 and 69, with 10,500 aged between 60 and 64, and 12,800 aged between 65 and 69 years, giving a total of 23,300 people aged between 60 and 69 in the District (16.9% of the overall population).
Graph 3 - Estimated Population by Age Band - East Lindsey 10.0%
9.0%
8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0%
2.0% % of overall population overall %of 1.0% 0.0%
Source: ONS Mid-Year Population Estimates 2015
As can be seen in graph 3 the younger peoples’ population in the District starts to drop for the first category that does not include a period of mandatory schooling (20-24 years). This downward trend continues until the 40-44 years category where it starts to slowly increase upwards. The District’s proportion of people aged 20-39 years is 17.5% of the overall population which is considerably lower than the Great Britain average of 26.4%. This can be linked to the outwards migration of younger adults to university or to follow up greater employment opportunities outside of the District.
The higher proportion of people of retirement age and the lower than average proportion of working age people in the District has a detrimental effect on the local economy as there are fewer actively involved in the local economy and a higher number of older persons can lead to greater pressures on local services .
Page 4
Annual State of the District Report 2016 Projected Population Increase
The Office of National Statistics has undertaken work based on the 2011 Census and other data which aims to identify levels of projected population increase. According to the research it is predicted that, by 2037 the population of East Lindsey will have increased from 137,900 to 153,575 (11.4% increase) – see graph 4.
Graph 4 - Estimated Population in East Lindsey - 1981 to 2037
160,000
150,000
140,000 130,000 120,000
(starts at 100,000) at (starts 110,000
Estimated Population Estimated 100,000
2017 2019 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035 2037
Estimated Population in East Lindsey Estimated Population Increase (2015-2037)
Source: Subnational population projections for England – last updated May 2014
It has been projected that the 16-64 years age group will reduce from 56.4% of the population in 2015 to 48.8% of the population in 2037, along with a slight reduction in the proportion who are aged 0-15 years, this means that the proportion of the population of East Lindsey that is aged 65 or older will continue to grow (see graph 5).
Graph 5 - East Lindsey - Age Group Comparison - 2014 vs. 2037 projection
60.0%
40.0%
20.0%
0.0%
Aged 0 - 15 years Aged 16 - 64 years Aged 65 and over % of Overall Population Overall %of
2014 2037
Source: Subnational population projections for England – last updated May 2014
An increasingly elderly population will put additional pressures on local services and health care provision. The ONS has projected that the number of people living to the age of 85 or above will sharply increase from 3.2% of the overall population in 2015 to 7.4% of the overall population in 2037 (see graph 6).
Graph 6 - Estimated Population by Age Band - East Lindsey - 2014 vs. 2037 projection
10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0%
0.0% % of overall population overall %of
2014 2037
Source: Subnational population projections for England – last updated May 2014 Page 5
Annual State of the District Report 2016 Life Expectancy at Birth
The Office of National Statistics monitors life expectancy at birth over a rolling three year timespan and separate figures are provided for males and females (see table 3).
2000 – 2002 2012 - 2014 Table 3 - Life Expectancy At Birth Males Females Males Females Boston 76.2 80.3 78.7 82.7 East Lindsey 76.4 80.5 78.9 82.3 Lincoln 74.6 79.6 78.2 82.0 North Kesteven 77.0 80.8 81.5 83.9 South Holland 76.4 80.9 79.7 83.1 South Kesteven 76.9 81.5 80.2 84.0 West Lindsey 76.1 80.5 79.7 83.6 Lincolnshire 76.3 80.7 79.6 83.2 East Midlands 76.1 80.5 79.4 83.0 England 76.0 80.7 79.5 83.2 Source: ONS
During the 2000-2002 period the average life expectancy for a male at birth was 2.5 years shorter than during the 2012- 14 period. During the same period the average life expectancy for a female at birth has increased by 1.8 years. This would indicate that there is likely to be an increasing number of older persons as the average life expectancy increases.
When compared against figures for England males have an average life expectancy of 0.6 fewer years than the national average, whereas females have an average life expectancy of 0.9 fewer years than the national average. In 2000-2002 the life expectancy for males was 0.4 more years than the national average, and 0.2 fewer years for females. Therefore during this period the District has continued to improve the average life expectancy of both males and females, but has fallen behind the national average.
Graph 7 - Average Life Expectancy At Birth - East Lindsey vs. England 84.0
82.0
80.0
78.0
Age (Years) Age 76.0
74.0
72.0
Male (EL) Female (EL) Male (England) Female (England)
Source: ONS Note: figures for individual areas are available from 1991-1993 period. However, County level data was not available until the 2000-2002 period.
As can be seen from Graph 7 the trajectory of life expectancy in East Lindsey was mostly following the national level until 2005-2007 for females and 2006-2008 for males where it has diverged.
Page 6
Annual State of the District Report 2016 Employment and Labour Supply
For the year July 2015 to June 2016 75.3% of working age people in the District were categorised as economically active (see table 3). This means they were either in employment or available for employment. The remaining 24.7% of the working age population is categorised as economically inactive and a full list of what this categorisation incorporates can be found in Table 5.
Table 4 - Employment and unemployment East Lindsey East Midlands Great Britain (July 2015 – June 2016) Number % % % All People Economically Active 57,300 75.3 77.8 77.9 In Employment 53,400 70.0 74.5 73.8 Employees 40,000 52.3 64.5 63.1 Self Employed 12,700 17.2 9.7 10.3 Unemployed 2,500 4.5 4.2 5.1
Males Economically Active 32,900 87.1 83.1 83.1 In Employment 30,000 79.2 79.5 78.7 Employees 21,000 54.6 66.3 64.4 Self Employed 9,000 24.6 13.0 13.9 Unemployed # # 4.2 5.1
Females Economically Active 24,400 63.7 72.6 72.7 In Employment 23,400 60.9 69.5 69.0 Employees 19,000 50.1 62.8 61.8 Self Employed 3,700 9.9 6.4 6.8 Unemployed # # 4.2 5.0 Source: ONS Annual Population Survey # = Sample size too small for reliable estimate
The proportion of the population who are recognised as being economically active stands below the proportion for the East Midlands and Great Britain as a whole, and has been below both these two areas for the majority of the time since 2004. As the periods covered by the survey encompass a 12 month period these smooth out the effects of seasonality on the workforce.
Graph 8 - Economic Activity - Time Series
85.00%
80.00%
75.00%
70.00%
% of overall population overall %of 65.00%
East Lindsey East Midlands Great Britain
Source: ONS Annual Population Survey
Page 7
Annual State of the District Report 2016
Table 5 - Economic inactivity East Lindsey East Midlands Great Britain (July 2015 – June 2016) Number % % % All People Economically Inactive Total 18,200 24.7% 22.2% 22.1% Student 3,500 19.2% 26.0% 26.1% Looking After Family/Home 7,100 38.9% 25.1% 24.7% Temporary Sick ! ! 1.0% 2.3% Long Term Sick 4,100 22.3% 22.0% 22.5% Discouraged ! ! # 0.4% Retired # # 14.2% 13.6% Other # # 11.4% 10.5% Source: ONS annual population survey # = Sample size too small for reliable estimate ! = Estimate is not available since the sample size is disclosive
Out of the working age population that are currently economically inactive 36.2% want a job – this is well above the East Midlands and Great Britain averages (see table 6).
East Lindsey East Midlands Great Britain Table 6 – Economically Inactive Persons Wanting A Job Number % % % Wants A Job 6,600 36.2% 24.0% 24.5% Does Not Want A Job 11,600 63.8% 76.0% 75.5% Source: ONS annual population survey
The level of qualifications held by the working age population in the District is considerably lower than the regional and national averages. In East Lindsey 25.2% of the population are qualified to a minimum of NVQ level 4 or equivalent. This compares to the East Midlands average of 31.8% and the Great Britain average of 37.1%. This qualification gap is not solely at the NVQ4 level but can be seen throughout the qualification levels.
8.2% of the working age population of East Lindsey has no formal qualifications – compared to 8.0% in the East Midlands as a whole and 8.6% for Great Britain (see graph 9).
Graph 9 - Qualification Levels
90.0%
80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0%
10.0% % of working age age population working %of 0.0% NVQ1 and above NVQ2 and above NVQ3 and above NVQ4 and above Other No Qualifications Qualifications
East Lindsey East Midlands Great Britain
Source: ONS Annual Population Survey
NVQ Levels are used to compare qualifications in a like-with-like basis. NVQs range from the lowest level qualification (level 1) right through to doctoral degrees (level 8). The UK Qualification Comparison Chart, adapted from an original chart by OFQUAL, gives a guide as to what level of qualification fits into which NVQ Level. For the purposes of this report we are only interested in the first four qualification levels, with all higher qualifications being combined into NVQ Level 4.
Page 8
Annual State of the District Report 2016
UK Qualification Comparison Chart NVQ Level 1 NVQ Level 2 NVQ Level 3 NVQ Level 4 Vocational Qualifications Vocational Qualifications Vocational Qualifications Higher National Diplomas Level 1 Level 2 Levels 3 & 4 (HND) GCSEs at Grade D-G GCSEs at Grade A*-C GCSE AS and A Levels Higher National Foundation Diplomas Higher Diplomas Advanced Diplomas Certificates (HNC) Functional Skills Level 1 Functional Skills Level 2 Batchelor’s Degrees with (English, Maths & ICT) (English, Maths & ICT) Honours Batchelor’s Degrees Graduate Diplomas Graduate Certificates Professional Graduate Certificate in Education (PGCE)
As a result of the lower levels of qualifications attained by the working age population in the District, the area is less likely to attract industry for which a highly qualified staff would be paramount. This is reflected when we look at the District by occupation (see Graph 10 and Table 7).
When compared to the national level there is almost a 9% deficit in the percentage of the population that is employed in traditional “white collar” (Groups 1-3) employment in the District as a whole when compared to the Great Britain average.
However, there is one anomaly in this group and that is the percentage identified as Group 1 – Managers, Directors and Senior Officials. This is proportionately more than 50% higher than those at regional or national level. The figures were checked with the ONS database to ensure accuracy and the time series shows this steadily increasing, up from 8.4% in October 2012 – September 2013. There are a greater number of employees within this group than any other single grouping within the dataset.
Despite this there are considerably fewer employees proportionately employed in Groups 2 and 3 – professional occupations (10.2% compared to 20.0% at national level) and associated professional and technical occupations (8.8% compared to 14.2% at national level).
Graph 10 - Employment By Occupation
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0% % of working age age population working %of
0.0% 1 Managers, 2 Professional 3 Associated 4 5 Skilled Trades 6 Caring, 7 Sales and 8 Process Plant 9 Elementary Directors and Occupations Professional Administrative Occupations Leisure and Customer and Machine Occupations Senior Officials and Technical and Secretarial Other Service Services Operatives Occupations Occupations
East Lindsey East Midlands Great Britain
Source: ONS Annual Population Survey
Page 9
Annual State of the District Report 2016
Table 7 - Employment by occupation East Lindsey East Midlands Great Britain (July 2015 – June 2016) Number % % % Soc 2010 Major Group 1-3 19,100 36.0% 41.1% 44.9% 1 Managers, Directors and Senior Officials 8,900 16.7% 10.0% 10.5% 2 Professional Occupations 5,500 10.2% 17.5% 20.0% 3 Associated Professional and Technical 4,700 8.8% 13.5% 14.2% Soc 2010 Major Group 4-5 13,400 25.2% 21.9% 21.2% 4 Administrative and Secretarial 5,900 11.0% 10.6% 10.5% 5 Skilled Trades Occupations 7,500 14.1% 11.3% 10.5% Soc 2010 Major Group 6-7 10,800 20.3% 16.5% 16.8% 6 Caring, Leisure and Other Service Occupations 4,100 7.7% 9.1% 9.2% 7 Sales and Customer Services Occupations 6,700 12.5% 7.4% 7.5% Soc 2010 Major Group 8-9 9,800 18.5% 20.4% 17.2% 8 Process Plant and Machine Operatives 4,900 9.2% 8.3% 6.4% 9 Elementary Occupations 4,900 9.2% 12.0% 10.7% Source: ONS annual population survey
The largest industry of employment in the District is the wholesale and retail trade (including motor industry services) with 19.0% of the employed population within this category. This reflects the situation at both regional and national levels – albeit a marginally higher proportion.
There is a considerably higher proportion of the employed population working in the accommodation and food services industries in the District (14.3%) when compared to the East Midlands (5.7%) and Great Britain (7.2%). This higher proportion is mainly due to the coastal region of the District and there is a proportion of this work that is highly likely to be seasonal.
The District has a much lower proportion working in transportation, which is unsurprising given the geographic location of the District and low number of major trunk roads and motorways.
Typically higher paid, highly qualified employment sectors (such as J, K and M) are much lower in proportion within the District than elsewhere. This fits with the lower average level of qualifications within the District, as mentioned earlier.
Graph 11 - Employment By Industry 20.0% 18.0%
16.0% 14.0% 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0%
% of working age age population working %of 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S
East Lindsey East Midlands Great Britain
Source: ONS Annual Population Survey
Note: a key to each of the categories listed on the table above can be found on the following page (table 8).
Page 10
Annual State of the District Report 2016
Table 8 – Industry Sectors Key B C D E F Water Supply; Electricity, Gas, Steam Sewerage, Waste Mining and Quarrying Manufacturing and Air Conditioning Construction Management and Supply Remediation Activities G H I J K Wholesale and Retail Trade; Repair of Motor Transportation and Accommodation and Information and Financial and Insurance Vehicles and Storage Food Services Activities Communication Activities Motorcycles L M N O P Public Administration Administrative and Professional, Scientific and Defence; Real Estate Activities Support Service Education and Technical Activities Compulsory Social Activities Security Q R S Human Health and Arts, Entertainment and Other Service Activities Social Work Activities Recreation
The industry and classifications of employment also has an impact on the levels of earnings from the respective forms of employment with East Lindsey seeing an average full time wage of £459.10 per week. This is around 17.8% less than the national average and 9.3% below the regional average (see graph 12). Generally speaking East Lindsey is a low-skill, low-wage economy in comparison.
Graph 12 - Average Gross Weekly Pay £560.00 £541.00
£540.00
£520.00 £501.70 £500.00
£480.00 £459.10 £460.00
£440.00 Average Gross PayWeekly Average
£420.00
£400.00
East Lindsey East Midlands Great Britain
Source: ONS Annual Population Survey
The average gross weekly pay in East Lindsey has shown a drop off from the high of £475.50 per week in 2014 (-3.6%) whereas the average for both East Midlands and Great Britain has continued to increase (by 3.7% and 3.8% over the same time period respectively). This annual earnings (based on 52 weeks) of £23,873.20 for East Lindsey compared to £26,088.40 for the East Midlands and £28,132.00 for Great Britain – a difference of £4,258.80 between the highest and lowest figures.
Page 11
Annual State of the District Report 2016
Graph 13 - Average Gross Weekly Pay - Time Series £600.00
£550.00
£500.00
£450.00
£400.00
Av. Gross Weekly Pay (£) Gross Weekly Av. £350.00
£300.00 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
East Lindsey East Midlands Great Britain
Source: ONS Annual Population Survey
Out-of-Work Benefits
The percentage of residents claiming out of work benefits has continued its’ general downward trend in 2016 when compared to previous years – as can be seen in Graph 14. However, as can be seen in the graph the District does suffer from distinct peaks and troughs in the percentage of the working age population that are claiming out of work benefits. This is due to the number of seasonal employment opportunities available in the tourist sector which creates this “wave” effect on the graph – something that is not evident in the regional or national figures.
During the summer season the percentage of out of work claimants drops below the average for the Country. Prior to 2016 it regularly dropped below the regional figures as well. This did not occur in 2016, as the percentage of claimants in the East Midlands region as a whole has dropped to 0.3% below the national average.
The figures stated in the graph not only map Job Seekers’ Allowance, but also take into account Universal Credit claimants who are required to seek work.
Page 12
Annual State of the District Report 2016
Graph 14 - Claimants Count - October 2013 to October 2016 4.5%
4.0%
3.5%
) 3.0%
2.5%
2.0%
1.5% % working age population age %working
1.0%
0.5%
0.0%
June 2014 June June 2015 June 2016 June
April 2014 April 2015 April 2016 April
August 2014 August 2015 August 2016 August
October2013 October2014 October2015 October2016
February2014 February2015 February2016
December 2015 December December 2013 December 2014 December
East Lindsey East Midlands England
Source: Department for Work and Pensions/NOMIS
East Lindsey has a higher proportion of working age population claiming benefits than either the East Midlands region or England. This is true in all three age categories at which the Department of Work and Pensions supplies relevant data – 18 to 24, 25 to 49 and 50+ years. 4.3% of the population aged between 18 and 24 years is currently claiming benefits (November 2016) compared to 2.3% in the East Midlands and 2.8% in England (see table 9).
Table 9 – Claimant Count by Age East Lindsey East Midlands England (November 2016) Number % % % Aged 18 to 24 370 4.3% 2.3% 2.8% Aged 25 to 49 760 2.2% 1.5% 1.8% Aged 50+ 400 1.3% 1.1% 1.5% Source: Department of Work and Pensions/NOMIS
Out of the working age population of East Lindsey 16.1% claim one form of benefit or another. Proportionately the largest claimant group is residents claiming ESA and Incapacity Benefit at 8.6% of the working age population, with the next highest being Carers at 3.2%.
ESA and Incapacity Benefit claimants are a higher proportion in the District than at regional (6.0%) or national levels (6.2%). Alongside this East Lindsey has almost double the proportion of residents claiming Carers benefits than the national average (3.2% against 1.7%) – see table 10.
Page 13
Annual State of the District Report 2016
Table 10 - Working-age client group - main benefit East Lindsey East Midlands Great Britain claimants (May 2016) Number % % % Total Claimants 12,410 16.1% 11.1% 11.5% By Statistical Group Main Out-Of-Work Benefits 8,760 11.3% 8.4% 8.7% Job Seekers 960 1.2% 1.2% 1.3% ESA and Incapacity Benefits 6,650 8.6% 6.0% 6.2% Lone Parents 880 1.1% 1.0% 1.0% Carers 2,460 3.2% 1.7% 1.7% Others On Income Related Benefits 270 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% Disabled 1,000 1.3% 0.8% 0.9% Bereaved 190 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% Source: Department of Work and Pensions/NOMIS
Economic Development
According to the UK Business Count in 2016 there were 5,475 enterprises operating in East Lindsey, with the vast majority (88.3%) of them being “Micro” enterprises – i.e. consisting of 0 to 9 employees. This is relatively similar to the proportion across the region with 88.6% of businesses in the East Midlands being “Micro” enterprises.
The report stated there are 5 large (i.e. 250+ employees) businesses in the District, giving 0.1% of the number of businesses. The regional average is 0.4% meaning there would need to be another 15 large businesses in the District to match the average. Whilst this may not sound like a lot of businesses, it would represent a minimum of 3,750 jobs (see table 11).
East Lindsey East Midlands Table 11 - UK Business Count (2016) Number % % Enterprises Micro (0 to 9) 4,835 88.3% 88.6% Small (10 to 49) 555 10.1% 9.4% Medium (50 to 249) 80 1.5% 1.7% Large (250+) 5 0.1% 0.4% Total 5,475 Local Units1 Micro (0 to 9) 5,420 84.5% 83.4% Small (10 to 49) 870 13.6% 13.4% Medium (50 to 249) 120 1.9% 2.8% Large (250+) 5 0.1% 0.4% Total 6,415 Source: UK Business Count 2016 1 – A local unit is an enterprise or part thereof (e.g. a workshop, factory, warehouse, office, mine or depot). An enterprise may consist of one or more local units.
The Council actively monitors retail activity in each of the town centres in the District. As part of this the number of retail ground floor units not being used in the town centres are monitored as a proportion of the total number of ground floor business space available.
There are wide variations between the different towns with the best performing town at the end of September 2016 being Skegness with no vacant shops and the worst performing being Spilsby with 13.64% being vacant.
Table 12 – Vacant town centre shops – end of Quarter 2 2016/17 Louth Mablethorpe Skegness Horncastle Spilsby Alford 5.91% 2.24% 0.00% 3.57% 13.64% 6.25% Source: Economic Development Team, East Lindsey District Council
Page 14
Annual State of the District Report 2016 Graph 15 shows that when looking back since 2010/11 Alford was the worst performing town back in 2010 with more than a quarter of all units being unoccupied. This has changed dramatically in the meantime with Alford now having a rate of 6.25% unoccupied. However, the reverse is true for Spilsby where the unoccupied percentage was as low as 7.4% back in March 2012 but has risen to 13.6% - with a high of 17.9% in December 2013.
The regional average (East Midlands) was 8.6% of shops at the end of September 2016, and an average of 9.5% nationally. The District average at the end of September 2016 was 4.5%.
Graph 15 - Number of retail ground floor units not being used as a proportion of the total number of ground floor businesses available - by town - Quarter 1 10/11 to Quarter 2 16/17
30
25
20
15 (Lower= (Lower= Better) 10
5
% of total number of ground floor businesses businesses offloorground number total %of 0
Jun-10 Jun-11 Jun-12 Jun-13 Jun-14 Jun-15 Jun-16
Sep-14 Sep-10 Sep-11 Sep-12 Sep-13 Sep-15 Sep-16
Dec-14 Dec-10 Dec-11 Dec-12 Dec-13 Dec-15
Mar-11 Mar-12 Mar-13 Mar-14 Mar-15 Mar-16 Quarter Ending
Louth Mablethorpe Skegness Horncastle Spilsby Alford
Source: Economic Development Team, East Lindsey District Council
Occupation rates in Louth, Mablethorpe, Skegness and Horncastle usually remain fairly static, though some seasonal variations can be seen in the coastal areas due to the effects of tourism on the area as a number of temporary shops take up premises for the summer season and vacate them by the end of the calendar year.
Crime and Community Safety
Community Safety Partnership
The East Lincolnshire Community Safety Partnership (ELCSP) works to create local solutions to local problems, tackling issues of crime and disorder and improve the quality of life for people living, working or visiting the area.
ELCSP is a statutory partnership made up of the following organisations:
East Lindsey, Boston Borough and South Holland District Councils Lincolnshire County Council Lincolnshire Police Lincolnshire Fire and Rescue Lincolnshire East and South Lincolnshire Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs)/Public Health Humberside, Lincolnshire and North Yorkshire Community Rehabilitation Company Ltd
A number of non-statutory agencies also contribute to the work of the partnership, including housing associations, schools, magistrates and the voluntary sector.
Page 15
Annual State of the District Report 2016 Each year ELCSP carries out a review of the crime and disorder levels across the partnership area. ELCSP also undertakes an annual Community Safety survey to gather the views of local residents to ensure that their priorities reflect what the communities are most concerned about.
ELCSP’s priorities for 2016-19 are:
Violence and Abuse Alcohol-related anti-social behaviour Community Engagement Emerging issues – being responsive to local trends and issues
Crime Data
Between 2014/15 and 2015/16 recorded crime in East Lindsey rose slightly by 3.4% (223 crimes), which is the latest data available full year data set. However, looking at the part-year April – October period recorded crime has increased by 14.5% in 2016 compared to the same point in 2015, and by 15.56% when compared to the same point in 2014.
When population change is taken into account there were 34.4 crimes per 1,000 population between April and October 2016, compared to 30.1 crimes per 1,000 population between April and October 2015 – an increase of 14.2% when population increase is taken into account.
As can be seen in Graph 16 there is a considerably higher number of crimes recorded in May and August 2016 than in either of the two prior years, indeed all months of the financial year so far have increased recorded crime levels apart from October when the number of recorded crimes returned to a very similar number to prior years.
Graph 16 - Recorded Crimes in East Lindsey - Comparison 900 800
700
600 500 400
300 Crimes Recorded Crimes 200 100 0
2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 (to end October 2016)
Source: Lincolnshire Police/Community Safety Priority Team
When comparing the periods between April and October 2015 to April and October 2016 it can be seen (Table 13) that there is only one category in which there has been a decrease in the number of crimes reported – Sexual Offences – which has fallen from 151 crimes in the 2015 period to 141 crimes in the 2016 period, a fall of 6.62%.
There have been a number of large percentage increases – Robbery (42.1%), Possession of Weapons (45.2%) and Miscellaneous Crimes against Society (26.2%) – but it should be noted that these are categories with relatively small numbers of crimes anyway so a small increase would lead to a higher percentage increase. A total of 38 extra crimes led to these increases.
Page 16
Annual State of the District Report 2016 However, the next highest category percentage-wise is Vehicle Offences, which rose by 28.27% - an increase of 67 crimes. This is followed by Violence against the Person – an increase of 21.04% (191 crimes). Tackling violence and abuse is one of the stated priorities for the ELCSP.
Table 13 – Crime Comparison for East Lindsey – April to October comparison April – October 2015 April – October 2016 % Change Violence against the person 908 1,099 21.04% Sexual Offences 151 141 -6.62% Robbery 19 27 42.11% Burglary 697 784 12.48% Vehicle Offences 237 304 28.27% Theft Offences 1,142 1,268 11.03% Arson & Criminal Damage 580 657 13.28% Drug Offences 177 185 4.52% Possession of Weapons 31 45 45.16% Public Order Offences 134 150 11.94% Miscellaneous Crimes Against Society 61 77 26.23% Total Crimes 4,137 4,737 14.50% Source: Lincolnshire Police/Community Safety Priority Team
Across Lincolnshire as a whole when comparing the April to October 2015 and the April to October 2016 periods crime per 1,000 population has increased by 0.5% from 29.46 crimes per 1,000 population to 29.61 crimes per 1,000 population.
Crime has risen in East Lindsey (14.2%), North Kesteven (3.9%) and West Lindsey (10.5%). Reductions have been seen in Boston (-17.4%), Lincoln (-2.9%) and South Kesteven (-6.7%), as can be seen in Graph 14 and Table 14.
Graph 14 - Recorded crime per 1,000 population - Districts 60
50
40
30
(Smaller (Smaller = Better) 20
Crimes 1,000 Population Per Crimes 10
0 Boston East Lindsey Lincoln North Kesteven South Holland South Kesteven West Lindsey
Apr - Oct 2015 Apr - Oct 2016
Source: Lincolnshire Police/Community Safety Priority Team
Page 17
Annual State of the District Report 2016
Table 14 – Crimes per 1,000 population comparison for Lincolnshire – 2015 vs. 2016 Apr – Oct 2015 Apr – Oct 2016 Crimes Per Crimes Per Geography % Change Number 1,000 Number 1,000 Population1 Population1 Boston 2,730 41.05 2,340 34.98 -17.4% East Lindsey 4,137 30.07 4,737 34.35 +14.2% Lincoln 5,263 54.71 5,163 53.17 -2.9% North Kesteven 1,607 14.48 1,683 15.04 +3.9% South Holland 2,058 22.77 2,076 22.76 0.0% South Kesteven 3,523 25.53 3,323 23.92 -6.7% West Lindsey 2,232 24.31 2,492 26.85 +10.5% Lincolnshire 21,550 29.46 21,814 29.61 +0.5% Source: Lincolnshire Police/Community Safety Priority Team/ ONS Mid-Year Estimates 1 – Estimated population figures taken from ONS Mid-Year Estimates Note: Crime figures are provisional figures and may be subject to change
Index of Multiple Deprivation 2015
What is the ‘Index of Multiple Deprivation’?
The Index of Multiple Deprivation is the official measure of relative deprivation for small areas in England. The Index of Multiple Deprivation ranks every small area in England from 1 (most deprived area) to 32,844 (least deprived area). An overall local authority district ranking is made up of the small areas – called Super Output Areas (or SOA’s for short) – within it. There can be multiple SOA’s in a ward and, whilst work has been undertaken to map all SOA’s to the new 2015 ward boundaries they do not always match so the a ‘best fit’ approach has been used. The Index of Multiple Deprivation was last updated in 2015.
The Index uses the same data sources and combines them in the same way for every small area in England. This means that different small areas can be compared by rank to other small areas. However, because the datasets change between publications it cannot be used to compare between time periods.
The Index is broken down into 7 smaller indices (with the weighting they are given to form the overall deprivation figure in brackets):
Income (22.5%); Employment (22.5%); Education, Skills and Training (13.5%); Health Deprivation and Disability (13.5%); Crime (9.3%); Barriers to Housing and Services (9.3%); and Living Environment (9.3%)
Overall, East Lindsey is ranked the 33rd most deprived local authority district area in England, out of 326. This means that the District is just on the border of being ranked in the top 10% most deprived local authority district areas in England. Its’ ranking for each of the Indices (as well as the overall rank) can be seen in graph 15.
Page 18
Annual State of the District Report 2016
Graph 15 - Index of Multiple Deprivation - Average Ranking
250
200
150
100
50
0 Average ranking ranking 326) (outAverage of Health Education, Barriers to Deprivation Living Income Employment Skills and Crime Housing and Overall and Environment Training Services Disability Rank 49 34 43 34 235 94 70 33 (Longer bars/higher rank = less deprived)
Whilst the overall deprivation ranking for the District is on the border of being in the top 10% most deprived there are some indices where the District is considered to be not so deprived – particularly in relation to crime where the District is ranked the 235th most deprived area out of 326, which would equally mean that it is the 91st least deprived area for this index.
Whilst the District is considered to be relatively deprived overall according to the Index of Multiple Deprivation that is not to say that all of the District should be considered to be the same. There are some wide variations within the District, as can be seen in the following breakdown.
Overall Deprivation
There are 12 SOA’s in East Lindsey that are ranked as in the top 10% most deprived areas of England in the overall Index of Multiple Deprivation. To further illustrate the point that the District is not deprived as a whole – as suggested by the overall ranking for the District – there are three SOA’s in East Lindsey in the top 20% least deprived areas of England as well (there are none in the top 10% least deprived). These areas are detailed in tables 13 and 14.
Table 13 - SOAs in Top 10% most deprived Table 14 - SOAs in Top 20% least deprived SOA Code Ward Rank SOA Code Ward Rank E01026048 Chapel St. Leonards 541 Holton-le-Clay & North E01026063 26,874 E01026093 Scarbrough & Seacroft 633 Thoresby E01026073 Mablethorpe 768 E01026119 Woodhall Spa 26,626 E01026083 St. Clement’s 948 E01026118 Woodhall Spa 26,587
E01026092 Scarbrough & Seacroft 1,253 E01026112 Wainfleet 1,349 E01026069 Ingoldmells 1,762 E01026074 Mablethorpe 1,794 E01026072 Mablethorpe 2,076 E01026114 Winthorpe 2,331 E01026109 Mablethorpe 2,624 E01026115 Winthorpe 2,851
Source: Indices of Multiple Deprivation, Department of Communities and Local Government
As can be seen from the deprivation tables, all of the SOA’s appearing in the top 10% most deprived SOA’s in England are based in or near the coastal areas of the District, further emphasising awareness that this is where the majority of the District’s deprived areas are located. Graph 16 demonstrates the distribution of ranking for the SOA’s in the district.
Page 19
Annual State of the District Report 2016
Graph 16 - East Lindsey's Super Output Areas by ranking group - overall deprivation 20
15
10
(SOA's) 5
0 0-10% 11-20% 21-30% 31-40% 41-50% 51-60% 61-70% 71-80% 81-90% 91-100%
Number of Super Super Areas Number Output of SOA's 12 10 18 15 6 5 9 3 3 0 Most Deprived (low %) to Least Deprived (high %)
Other Deprivation Indices
The overall deprivation ranking aims to give the overall picture as to how deprived an area is, but does not give the whole picture as a SOA that is ranked as highly deprived in most of the domains can actually also be considered to be less deprived in others.
The heat map tables (tables 15-17) aim to demonstrate where the most and least deprived areas are in the District for each of the domains. The heat map works by assigning a colour to each figure on a graduating scale of colour from red (most deprived) to green (least deprived). The percentage scale runs from the most deprived SOA (0.0%) to the least deprived SOA (100.0%).
Table 16 highlights that there are four SOA’s in East Lindsey that appear in both the top 10% most deprived and top 10% least deprived areas for one or more domain. A further 25 SOA’s in East Lindsey do not appear in either category.
Page 20
Annual State of the District Report 2016
Table 15 - Heat map of SOA’s in top 10% most deprived places in England for one or more domains (ordered by overall ranking – most deprived to least deprived)
Education, Health Barriers to Living SOA Reference Ward Overall Income Employment Skills and Deprivation Crime Housing and Environment Training and Disability Services
E01026048 Chapel St. Leonards Ward 1.6% 8.4% 0.8% 5.7% 2.1% 31.0% 14.4% 2.0% E01026093 Scarbrough & Seacroft Ward 1.9% 6.5% 1.4% 14.6% 6.2% 0.5% 57.4% 1.0% E01026073 Mablethorpe Ward 2.3% 6.9% 0.4% 4.0% 1.2% 20.5% 61.2% 25.5% E01026083 St. Clement's Ward 2.9% 4.5% 0.7% 6.3% 3.4% 10.5% 44.7% 66.2% E01026092 Scarbrough & Seacroft Ward 3.8% 6.2% 1.7% 15.8% 2.0% 25.3% 73.3% 6.5% E01026112 Wainfleet Ward 4.1% 3.7% 2.6% 7.8% 7.6% 27.6% 53.5% 10.8% E01026069 Ingoldmells Ward 5.4% 12.5% 8.6% 9.1% 7.6% 0.2% 26.9% 13.5% E01026074 Mablethorpe Ward 5.5% 8.0% 2.1% 7.3% 5.5% 46.6% 20.5% 44.1% E01026072 Mablethorpe Ward 6.3% 13.0% 2.7% 2.1% 3.2% 42.0% 73.6% 51.0% E01026114 Winthorpe Ward 7.1% 12.4% 3.2% 14.0% 7.7% 20.3% 68.5% 6.9% E01026109 Mablethorpe Ward 8.0% 21.0% 2.7% 8.2% 7.3% 67.2% 9.5% 27.7% E01026115 Winthorpe Ward 8.7% 10.4% 6.3% 8.6% 7.2% 16.8% 52.4% 34.8% E01026094 Scarbrough & Seacroft Ward 10.5% 12.0% 6.2% 8.9% 6.6% 40.8% 36.5% 65.3% E01026050 Chapel St. Leonards Ward 12.9% 23.8% 7.7% 7.5% 5.9% 79.6% 38.4% 24.4% E01026097 Scarbrough & Seacroft Ward 13.3% 17.4% 9.9% 15.1% 7.9% 7.2% 73.8% 54.3% E01026108 Trinity Ward 13.4% 10.5% 7.8% 12.0% 11.4% 72.1% 39.7% 52.1% E01026095 Scarbrough & Seacroft Ward 14.4% 21.2% 11.4% 29.4% 4.7% 16.9% 54.2% 20.2% E01026049 Chapel St. Leonards Ward 15.4% 27.8% 13.4% 19.3% 14.3% 81.0% 4.7% 11.3% E01026101 Spilsby Ward 16.6% 17.7% 10.0% 13.4% 10.3% 34.7% 86.0% 45.7% E01026103 Sutton on Sea Ward 17.2% 22.0% 8.0% 18.4% 6.9% 72.5% 53.1% 48.6% E01026111 Friskney Ward 19.7% 28.8% 17.3% 21.0% 17.1% 64.7% 9.0% 20.6% E01026056 Croft Ward 20.9% 37.5% 23.1% 25.3% 24.5% 43.1% 5.5% 9.1% E01026099 Marshchapel & Somercotes Ward 21.9% 43.8% 23.9% 32.9% 28.3% 74.8% 1.7% 6.0% E01026085 St. Clement's Ward 22.5% 31.6% 14.0% 20.4% 8.2% 53.3% 30.6% 88.2% E01026117 Withern & Theddlethorpe Ward 26.0% 41.5% 28.3% 40.2% 29.1% 88.6% 1.9% 11.8% Scale: Red = most deprived – Green = least deprived Continued on next page
Page 21
Annual State of the District Report 2016
Table 15 - Heat map of SOA’s in top 10% most deprived places in England for one or more domains (ordered by overall ranking – most deprived to least deprived)
Education, Health Barriers to Living SOA Reference Ward Overall Income Employment Skills and Deprivation Crime Housing and Environment Training and Disability Services
Continued from previous page E01026113 Willoughby with Sloothby Ward 27.1% 40.0% 34.4% 25.7% 37.0% 86.6% 2.2% 15.2% E01026055 Croft Ward 28.3% 37.9% 27.0% 41.0% 25.1% 98.4% 4.0% 23.0% E01026068 Hagworthingham Ward 28.4% 44.9% 38.8% 50.1% 38.1% 81.5% 1.5% 5.7% E01026075 Coningsby & Mareham Ward 29.0% 46.8% 37.0% 34.6% 40.9% 96.5% 3.0% 5.7% E01026071 Binbrook Ward 33.5% 54.4% 51.0% 50.2% 46.1% 95.2% 0.8% 7.0% E01026060 Halton Holegate Ward 35.4% 53.2% 44.5% 41.9% 40.8% 87.7% 2.3% 17.7% E01026057 Sibsey & Stickney Ward 35.5% 47.6% 49.9% 40.7% 54.1% 82.5% 4.3% 7.7% E01026082 Roughton Ward 36.7% 55.1% 51.3% 57.5% 42.1% 87.1% 0.9% 16.2% E01026105 Tetford & Donington Ward 38.3% 60.6% 55.6% 63.6% 38.2% 87.3% 2.6% 7.8% E01026076 Marshchapel & Somercotes Ward 39.9% 52.6% 50.7% 39.9% 43.3% 88.1% 3.2% 30.2% E01026070 Legbourne Ward 43.2% 71.5% 57.0% 58.3% 38.5% 72.2% 2.9% 18.8% E01026107 Tetney Ward 52.4% 70.2% 69.7% 63.9% 49.9% 96.5% 3.6% 26.1% Scale: Red = most deprived – Green = least deprived
Table 16 - Heat map of SOA’s that appear in both the top 10% most deprived and top 10% least deprived SOAs for one or more domains
Education, Health Barriers to Living SOA Reference Ward Overall Income Employment Skills and Deprivation Crime Housing and Environment Training and Disability Services
E01026107 Tetney Ward 52.4% 70.2% 69.7% 63.9% 49.9% 96.5% 3.6% 26.1% E01026071 Binbrook Ward 33.5% 54.4% 51.0% 50.2% 46.1% 95.2% 0.8% 7.0% E01026075 Coningsby & Mareham Ward 29.0% 46.8% 37.0% 34.6% 40.9% 96.5% 3.0% 5.7% E01026055 Croft Ward 28.3% 37.9% 27.0% 41.0% 25.1% 98.4% 4.0% 23.0% Scale: Red = most deprived – Green = least deprived
Page 22
Annual State of the District Report 2016
Table 17 - Heat map of SOA’s in top 10% least deprived places in England for one or more domains (ordered by overall ranking – least deprived to most deprived)
Education, Health Barriers to Living SOA Reference Ward Overall Income Employment Skills and Deprivation Crime Housing and Environment Training and Disability Services
E01026063 Holton-le-Clay & North Thoresby Ward 81.8% 80.9% 69.5% 44.4% 53.2% 94.2% 90.5% 89.8% E01026119 Woodhall Spa Ward 81.1% 81.0% 63.7% 84.2% 45.0% 99.1% 58.4% 74.5% E01026118 Woodhall Spa Ward 80.9% 73.9% 70.0% 72.0% 49.2% 93.8% 56.0% 88.9% E01026061 Holton-le-Clay & North Thoresby Ward 75.2% 69.0% 70.1% 59.2% 38.7% 92.1% 69.3% 79.5% E01026065 Horncastle Ward 74.5% 66.1% 58.9% 69.7% 48.0% 92.5% 75.8% 64.8% E01026062 Holton-le-Clay & North Thoresby Ward 72.3% 51.2% 68.7% 53.9% 45.8% 91.0% 90.2% 83.4% E01026066 Horncastle Ward 62.9% 64.3% 53.9% 58.1% 45.4% 97.0% 36.1% 52.3% E01026098 Sibsey & Stickney Ward 60.1% 60.3% 50.7% 53.0% 53.4% 95.1% 27.0% 56.7% E01026047 Burgh le Marsh Ward 54.3% 57.0% 54.8% 38.0% 27.5% 91.6% 54.6% 47.8% E01026058 Grimoldby Ward 52.6% 52.3% 48.9% 50.0% 45.7% 96.6% 22.0% 42.9% E01026107 Tetney Ward 52.4% 70.2% 69.7% 63.9% 49.9% 96.5% 3.6% 26.1% E01026120 Woodhall Spa Ward 52.2% 44.1% 38.3% 55.6% 26.5% 91.4% 92.1% 52.5% E01026054 Coningsby & Mareham Ward 48.6% 39.6% 49.4% 33.1% 26.4% 91.1% 87.4% 42.6% E01032987 Priory & St. James' Ward 47.3% 38.2% 36.9% 44.2% 34.5% 58.4% 98.7% 46.2% E01026052 Coningsby & Mareham Ward 42.3% 44.1% 40.1% 34.3% 30.2% 92.3% 34.9% 31.9% E01026081 Priory & St. James' Ward 38.5% 33.8% 39.6% 40.4% 23.9% 50.4% 96.3% 19.6% E01032986 Priory & St. James' Ward 35.8% 36.5% 33.6% 57.2% 17.2% 41.4% 98.7% 14.1% E01026071 Binbrook Ward 33.5% 54.4% 51.0% 50.2% 46.1% 95.2% 0.8% 7.0% E01026075 Coningsby & Mareham Ward 29.0% 46.8% 37.0% 34.6% 40.9% 96.5% 3.0% 5.7% E01026055 Croft Ward 28.3% 37.9% 27.0% 41.0% 25.1% 98.4% 4.0% 23.0% E01026064 Horncastle Ward 25.7% 21.7% 20.0% 25.6% 13.7% 74.5% 24.5% 91.3% E01026104 Sutton on Sea Ward 21.8% 29.0% 12.6% 12.7% 20.1% 69.2% 14.9% 92.9% E01026042 Alford Ward 21.0% 14.9% 13.9% 29.2% 17.6% 60.1% 90.2% 18.7% Scale: Red = most deprived – Green = least deprived
Source: Indices of Multiple Deprivation, Department of Communities and Local Government (for Tables 15-17)
Page 23
East Lindsey District This profile was published on 6 September 2016 Health Profile 2016
Health in summary N The health of people in East Lindsey is varied compared with the England average. East Lindsey is one of the 20% most deprived districts/unitary authorities in England and about 21% (4,500) of children live in low income families. Life expectancy for both men and women is lower than the England average. Louth Mablethorpe Health inequalities Life expectancy is 6.1 years lower for men in the most deprived areas of East Lindsey than in the least Alford deprived areas. Horncastle Child health Spilsby Woodhall Spa In Year 6, 22.9% (279) of children are classified as Skegness obese, worse than the average for England. The rate of alcohol-specific hospital stays among those under 18 was 51.4*. This represents 12 stays per year. Levels of GCSE attainment are worse than the England average.
Adult health 10 miles The rate of alcohol-related harm hospital stays is 635*. This represents 970 stays per year. The rate of self- Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database rights 2016 harm hospital stays is 202.5*. This represents 241 stays per year. The rate of smoking related deaths is 305*, worse than the average for England. This represents Population: 138,000 333 deaths per year. Estimated levels of adult excess Mid-2014 population estimate. Source: Office for National Statistics. weight are worse than the England average. The rate of people killed and seriously injured on roads is worse This profile gives a picture of people’s health in than average. Rates of sexually transmitted infections East Lindsey. It is designed to help local and TB are better than average. The rate of early deaths government and health services understand their from cardiovascular diseases is worse than average. community’s needs, so that they can work together The rate of violent crime is better than average. to improve people’s health and reduce health inequalities. Local priorities Priorities in East Lindsey include reducing alcohol misuse, smoking, and obesity. For more information see Visit www.healthprofiles.info for more profiles, more www.research-lincs.org.uk or www.lincolnshire.gov.uk information and interactive maps and tools.
* rate per 100,000 population Follow @PHE_uk on Twitter
© Crown Copyright 2016 1 East Lindsey - 6 September 2016 Deprivation: a national view
The map shows differences in deprivation in this area This chart shows the percentage of the population based on national comparisons, using quintiles (fifths) who live in areas at each level of deprivation. of the Index of Multiple Deprivation 2015 (IMD2015), shown by lower super output area. The darkest coloured areas are some of the most deprived 100 neighbourhoods in England. N Lines represent electoral wards (2015) 90 80
70
60
50
40 % Residents
30
20
10
0 England East Lindsey Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database rights 2016
Most deprived quintile Least deprived quintile
Life expectancy: inequalities in this local authority
The charts below show life expectancy for men and women in this local authority for 2012-2014. Each chart is divided into deciles (tenths) by deprivation (IMD2010), from the most deprived decile on the left of the chart to the least deprived decile on the right. The steepness of the slope represents the inequality in life expectancy that is related to deprivation in this local area. If there was no inequality in life expectancy as a result of deprivation, the line would be horizontal.
Life expectancy gap for men: 6.1 years Life expectancy gap for women: 2.9 years 95 95
90 90
85 85
80 80
75 75
Life expectancy at birth (years) 70 Life expectancy at birth (years) 70
65 65 Most deprived Least deprived Most deprived Least deprived Inequality slope for men Life expectancy for men Inequality slope for women Life expectancy for women
© Crown Copyright 2016 2 East Lindsey - 6 September 2016 Health inequalities: changes over time
These charts provide a comparison of the changes in early death rates (in people under 75) between this area and all of England. Early deaths from all causes also show the differences between the most and least deprived quintile (IMD2010) in this area. (Data points are the midpoints of 3 year averages of annual rates, for example 2005 represents the period 2004 to 2006). Early deaths from all causes: Early deaths from all causes: MEN WOMEN 1500 1500
1250 1250
1000 1000
750 750
500 500 Age-standardised rate Age-standardised rate per 100,000 population 250 per 100,000 population 250
0 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Years Years
Early deaths from heart disease and stroke Early deaths from cancer 250 250
200 200
150 150
100 100 Age-standardised rate Age-standardised rate per 100,000 population 50 per 100,000 population 50
0 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Years Years
England average Local average Local least deprived Local most deprived Local inequality Health inequalities: ethnicity
Percentage of hospital admissions that were emergencies, by ethnic group, 2014/15
60% This chart shows the percentage of hospital admissions for each ethnic group that were 50% emergencies, rather than planned. A higher percentage of emergency admissions may be caused by higher levels of urgent need for hospital services 40% or lower use of services in the community. Comparing percentages for each ethnic group may help identify inequalities. 30% East Lindsey
95% confidence interval 20% England average (all ethnic groups)
10% Figures based on small numbers of admissions have been suppressed to avoid any potential disclosure of information about individuals.
Emergency admissions: age-standardised percentage 0% All ethnic White Mixed Asian Black Chinese Other Unknown groups 15,226 14,384 29 19 28 - - 702 Local number of emergency admissions 36.7 38.0 33.4 31.4 39.2 - - 21.9 Local value % 39.4 39.9 38.8 44.0 43.1 35.9 44.9 30.9 England value %
© Crown Copyright 2016 3 East Lindsey - 6 September 2016 E07000137 Health summary for East Lindsey
The chart below shows how the health of people in this area compares with the rest of England. This area’s result for each indicator is shown as a circle. The average rate for England is shown by the black line, which is always at the centre of the chart. The range of results for all local areas in England is shown as a grey bar. A red circle means that this area is significantly worse than England for that indicator; however, a green circle may still indicate an important public health problem.
€ Significantly worse than England average Regional average England average England England Not significantly different from England average worst best 25th 75th Significantly better than England average Percentile Percentile Not compared
Period Local No Local Eng Eng Eng Domain Indicator total count value value worst England Range best
1 Deprivation score (IMD 2015) # 2015 n/a 28.9 21.8 42.0 5.0
2 Children in low income families (under 16s) 2013 4,455 20.8 18.6 34.4 5.9
3 Statutory homelessness† 2014/15 *1 *1 0.9 7.5 0.1
4 GCSEs achieved† 2014/15 750 52.2 57.3 41.5 76.4
5 Violent crime (violence offences) 2014/15 1,303 9.5 13.5 31.7 3.4 Our communities 6 Long term unemployment 2015 344 4.4 4.6 15.7 0.5
7 Smoking status at time of delivery 2014/15 x1 x1 11.4 27.2 2.1
8 Breastfeeding initiation 2014/15 772 x1 74.3 47.2 92.9
9 Obese children (Year 6) 2014/15 279 22.9 19.1 27.8 9.2 health 10 Alcohol-specific hospital stays (under 18) 2012/13 - 14/15 37 51.4 36.6 104.4 10.2 Children's and young people's 11 Under 18 conceptions 2014 53 23.5 22.8 43.0 5.2
12 Smoking prevalence in adults† 2015 n/a 20.5 16.9 32.3 7.5
13 Percentage of physically active adults 2015 n/a 55.5 57.0 44.8 69.8 Adults' lifestyle
health and 14 Excess weight in adults 2012 - 14 n/a 72.3 64.6 74.8 46.0
15 Cancer diagnosed at early stage # 2014 x1 x1 50.7 36.3 67.2
16 Hospital stays for self-harm 2014/15 241 202.5 191.4 629.9 58.9
17 Hospital stays for alcohol-related harm 2014/15 970 635 641 1223 374
18 Recorded diabetes 2014/15 11,252 9.2 6.4 9.2 3.3
19 Incidence of TB 2012 - 14 10 2.4 13.5 100.0 0.0
20 New sexually transmitted infections (STI) 2015 208 263 815 3263 191 Disease and poor health 21 Hip fractures in people aged 65 and over 2014/15 240 642 571 745 361
22 Life expectancy at birth (Male) 2012 - 14 n/a 78.9 79.5 74.7 83.3
23 Life expectancy at birth (Female) 2012 - 14 n/a 82.3 83.2 79.8 86.7
24 Infant mortality† 2012 - 14 11 2.9 4.0 7.2 0.6
25 Killed and seriously injured on roads 2012 - 14 315 76.8 39.3 119.4 9.9
26 Suicide rate† 2012 - 14 40 12.3 10.0
27 Deaths from drug misuse # 2012 - 14 10 x2 3.4
28 Smoking related deaths 2012 - 14 1,000 305.3 274.8 458.1 152.9
29 Under 75 mortality rate: cardiovascular 2012 - 14 452 90.4 75.7 135.0 39.3
30 Under 75 mortality rate: cancer 2012 - 14 758 151.7 141.5 195.6 102.9
Life expectancy and causes of death 31 Excess winter deaths Aug 2011 - Jul 190 10.8 15.6 31.0 2.3 2014 Indicator notes 1 Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) 2015 2 % children (under 16) in low income families 3 Eligible homeless people not in priority need, crude rate per 1,000 households 4 5 A*-C including English & Maths, % pupils at end of key stage 4 resident in local authority 5 Recorded violence against the person crimes, crude rate per 1,000 population 6 Crude rate per 1,000 population aged 16-64 7 % of women who smoke at time of delivery 8 % of all mothers who breastfeed their babies in the first 48hrs after delivery 9 % school children in Year 6 (age 10-11) 10 Persons under 18 admitted to hospital due to alcohol-specific conditions, crude rate per 100,000 population 11 Under-18 conception rate per 1,000 females aged 15-17 (crude rate) 12 Current smokers, Annual Population Survey (APS) 13 % adults achieving at least 150 mins physical activity per week 14 % adults classified as overweight or obese, Active People Survey 15 Experimental statistics - % of cancers diagnosed at stage 1 or 2 16 Directly age sex standardised rate per 100,000 population 17 The number of admissions involving an alcohol-related primary diagnosis or an alcohol-related external cause (narrow definition), directly age standardised rate per 100,000 population 18 % people on GP registers with a recorded diagnosis of diabetes 19 Crude rate per 100,000 population 20 All new diagnoses (excluding Chlamydia under age 25), crude rate per 100,000 population 21 Directly age and sex standardised rate of emergency admissions, per 100,000 population aged 65 and over 22, 23 The average number of years a person would expect to live based on contemporary mortality rates 24 Rate of deaths in infants aged <1 year per 1,000 live births 25 Rate per 100,000 population 26 Directly age standardised mortality rate from suicide and injury of undetermined intent per 100,000 population (aged 10+) 27 Directly age standardised rate per 100,000 population 28 Directly age standardised rate per 100,000 population aged 35 and over 29 Directly age standardised rate per 100,000 population aged under 75 30 Directly age standardised rate per 100,000 population aged under 75 31 Ratio of excess winter deaths (observed winter deaths minus expected deaths based on non-winter deaths) to average non-winter deaths (three years) † Indicator has had methodological changes so is not directly comparable with previously released values. € "Regional" refers to the former government regions. # New indicator for Health Profiles 2016. *1 Value suppressed for disclosure control due to small count x1 Value not published for data quality reasons x2 Value cannot be calculated as number of cases is too small More information is available at www.healthprofiles.info and http://fingertips.phe.org.uk/profile/health-profiles Please send any enquiries to [email protected]
You may re-use this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/ © Crown Copyright 2016 4 East Lindsey - 6 September 2016 www.healthprofiles.info