Asessing Needs and Assets in Glossop-2014
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
! Health'and' Communities' Department,' Derbyshire'County' Council' ASSESSING'NEEDS'AND' ' DECEMBER'2014' ASSETS%IN%GLOSSOP! A partnership approach to collection and synthesis of evidence from key informant interviews, community profiling, asset/ service mapping and stakeholder consultation to inform health and well- being improvement in Glossop Preliminaries! Contributors' Jo Baines, Chief Officer, Volunteer Centre Glossop Nigel Caldwell, General Manager, High Peak Community and Voluntary Support Dr Alan Dow, General Practitioner and CCG Chair, Tameside and Glossop Clinical Commissioning Group Karen Foster, Gamesley/ Glossop Sure Start Children's Centre Co-ordinator, Derbyshire County Council Zara Hammond, Specialty Registrar in Public Health, Derbyshire County Council Julie Hirst, Health Improvement Principal, Derbyshire County Council Tanya Lloyd, Volunteer and Glossop Resident Dr Bruce McKenzie, Clinical Assistant Professor and Hon. Specialty Registrar in Public Health, University of Nottingham and Public Health England (East Midlands) Cllr Anthony McKeown, Elected Member for Glossop, High Peak Borough Council Elaine Penning, Community Health Development Locality Lead, Derbyshire County Council Elaine Richardson, Strategic Programmes Manager/ Commissioning Lead for Planned Care and Cancer, Tameside and Glossop Clinical Commissioning Group Katie Rochford, Volunteer and Glossop Resident Lesley Stevens, Partnership Officer, Peak District Partnership & High Peak Borough Council Heather Wesson, Public Health Development Worker, Derbyshire County Council Cllr Ellie Wilcox, Elected Member for Glossop, Derbyshire County Council Sarah Willett, Volunteer and Glossop Resident Accountable'Consultant' Stephen Pintus, Consultant in Public Health, Derbyshire County Council ASSESSING'NEEDS'&'ASSETS'IN'GLOSSOP' 1! Statement'of'purpose' This report describes a partnership approach to collection and synthesis of evidence from key informant interviews, community profiling, asset/ service mapping and stakeholder consultation. It aims to identify gaps in current service provision and to provide evidence for prioritising options to improve health and well-being in Glossop (here regarded as synonymous with Glossopdale) and to reduce health inequalities. Intended'audience' This report will be of interest to those with roles in providing or commissioning health and related services for Glossop residents, the users of those services and individuals or organisations with an interest in the improvement of health and well- being in Glossop. Acknowledgements' The Contributors wish to acknowledge the assistance gratefully received from members of the community in Glossop and other stakeholders who agreed to be interviewed as part of this assessment. The Public Health Intelligence team, Derbyshire County Council, provided support. Abbreviations/'acronyms'used'in'this'report' BC borough council CAB Citizens Advice Bureau CCG clinical commissioning group CC county council DC district council DCC Derbyshire County Council DCHS Derbyshire Community Health Services NHS Trust DDDC Derbyshire Dales District Council GP general practice (or practitioner) HCFT Healthcare Foundation Trust HNA health needs assessment HPBC High Peak Borough Council IMD Index of Multiple Deprivation LDD learning difficulty and/or disability LSOA lower layer super output area MSOA middle layer super output area NEET not in education, employment or training NHS National Health Service PHE Public Health England PSHE personal, social and health education SEND special educational needs and disabilities T&G CCG Tameside and Glossop Clinical Commissioning Group TMBC Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council 2' ASSESSING'NEEDS'&'ASSETS'IN'GLOSSOP! Interpretation'of'this'report Restrictions'on'scope' In pre-defining the topic scope of this report, our ability to capture health needs outside of our chosen framework for assessing need is constrained. Limitations'of'evidence' The data contained in this report are aggregate and may therefore obfuscate some important variations in health indicators between community groups. Where available we have presented ward-level data to help identify inequalities within Glossop; we have deliberately avoided presenting district-level data and data that are very dated. Some indicators, however, have not been directly measured at ward level and therefore only modelled estimates are available, based on larger geographic areas. Practice-level health indicators are taken from the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) database, which was designed for performance management of general practices rather than as an epidemiological profiling tool. QOF is widely considered to under-estimate the community prevalence of ill health. The small number of key informant interviews and stakeholder questionnaires collated for this assessment may introduce bias and reflect an incomplete picture of health needs or service provision. Low numbers of events (below 5) are routinely supressed in official statistics; this may account for some missing data. Implications,'options'and'recommendations' The Steering Group acknowledge the desirability of making ‘SMART’ recommendations (specific, measurable, assignable/ attainable, relevant, time- bound) based on this report. This report is informational; subsequent work will review options and identify priorities for health improvement in Glossop. Interpretation'of'quilt'tables' A quilt table is a popular presentation format for health indicator data and is used extensively in this report. The colour coding refers to statistically significant differences and can be interpreted using the following keys: Worse than England Similar to England Better than England No statistical comparison average average average made Higher than England Similar to England Lower than England No statistical comparison average average average made Document'control' Classification: Public: information that can be made freely available in the public domain & would not cause damage or harm if released Date: 17 December 2014 Version: Final Enquiries: [email protected] ASSESSING'NEEDS'&'ASSETS'IN'GLOSSOP' 3! Table'of'contents' Summary p.6 1 Introduction p.11 1.1 Background 1.2 Aim and objectives of this assessment 1.3 Scope of this assessment 1.4 Outline of approach to assessing needs and assets 1.5 How our report is structured 2 The people of Glossop p.16 2.1 Age and sex of Glossop residents 2.2 Population projection 2.3 Ethnic composition 2.4 Socio-economic status 3 Where people live p.22 3.1 What do the community feel is needed? 3.2 What do the figures suggest might be needed? 3.3 What assets do the community identify? 3.4 What services are currently provided? 3.5 What do service providers and others think? 3.6 What are the key messages? 4 Money to live off p.38 4.1 What do the community feel is needed? 4.2 What do the figures suggest might be needed? 4.3 What assets do the community identify? 4.4 What services are currently provided? 4.5 What do service providers and others think? 4.6 What are the key messages? 5 Choice of food p.48 5.1 What do the community feel is needed? 5.2 What do the figures suggest might be needed? 5.3 What assets do the community identify? 5.4 What services are currently provided? 5.5 What do service providers and others think? 5.6 What are the key messages? 4' ASSESSING'NEEDS'&'ASSETS'IN'GLOSSOP! 6 Getting about p.55 6.1 What do the community feel is needed? 6.2 What do the figures suggest might be needed? 6.3 What assets do the community identify? 6.4 What services are currently provided? 6.5 What do service providers and others think? 6.6 What are the key messages? 7 Learning and training p.62 7.1 What do the community feel is needed? 7.2 What do the figures suggest might be needed? 7.3 What assets do the community identify? 7.4 What services are currently provided? 7.5 What do service providers and others think? 7.6 What are the key messages? 8 Health and health care p.72 8.1 What do the community feel is needed? 8.2 What do the figures suggest might be needed? 8.3 What assets do the community identify? 8.4 What services are currently provided? 8.5 What do service providers and others think? 8.6 What are the key messages? ASSESSING'NEEDS'&'ASSETS'IN'GLOSSOP' 5! Summary! This report describes a partnership approach to collection and synthesis of evidence from key informant interviews, community profiling, asset/ service mapping and stakeholder consultation to inform health and well-being improvement in Glossop. Geographic scope: Dinting; Whitfield; Old Glossop; Howard Town; Gamesley; Simmondley; Hadfield North; Hadfield South; Tintwistle; Padfield and St. John’s. Topic scope: Where people live (including housing and some aspects of community life and the urban/natural environment); Money to live off (including employment and related personal income); Choice of food (including the availability and affordability of healthy options); Getting about (focussing on transport and general access to services); Learning and training (including measures of educational attainment); Health and health care (including lifestyle and leisure, disability, mental health and well-being, physical health and injury, deaths and life expectancy, and access to public health, primary and secondary health services). Overarching"key"messages" The following messages emerged from Chapter 2 (‘The people of Glossop’) and/ or as a result of looking across the sections of this report: Wider health determinants: Stakeholders recognise the need to tackle the ‘upstream’