INCOME DEPRIVATION IN TYNE & WEAR A REPORT BASED ON THE INDEX OF MULTIPLE DEPRIVATION (IMD) 2000 ALSO INCLUDING THE CHILD POVERTY INDEX MAY 2001 By Nicola Crosby Kadhem Jallab Reference: SR 01/1 Price: £15.00 TYNE & WEAR RESEARCH AND INFORMATION 1st Floor Provincial House Northumberland Street Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7DQ Tel: (0191) 277 1912, Fax: (0191) 277 1911 E-MAIL: [email protected] WEBSITE: www.twri.org.uk Supported jointly by Cities of Newcastle and Sunderland and the Metropolitan Boroughs of Gateshead, North Tyneside and South Tyneside Income Deprivation in Tyne & Wear CONTENTS KEY POINTS ……………………………………………………………………………….…… 1.0 Introduction …………………………………………………..…………………………….. 1 1.1 The IMD 2000 ……………………………………………………………………….. 1 2.0 Income Deprivation at District Level in Tyne & Wear …………………………………….. 3 2.1 Income Deprivation at Ward Level in Tyne & Wear ………………………………... 3 3.0 Child Poverty ……………………………………………………………………………….. 6 3.1 The IMD Child Poverty Index in Tyne & Wear ……………………………………... 6 4.0 Income Deprivation and Child Poverty by District ………………………………………… 13 4.1 Income Deprivation in Gateshead …………………………………………………… 13 4.2 Child Poverty in Gateshead ………………………………………………………….. 13 4.3 Income Deprivation in Newcastle …………………………………………………… 17 4.4 Child Poverty in Newcastle ………………………………………………………….. 17 4.5 Income Deprivation in North Tyneside ……………………………………………… 21 4.6 Child Poverty in North Tyneside …………………………………………………….. 21 4.7 Income Deprivation in South Tyneside ……………………………………………… 25 4.8 Child Poverty in South Tyneside …………………………………………………….. 25 4.9 Income Deprivation in Sunderland …………………………………………………... 29 4.10 Child Poverty in Sunderland ………………………………………………………… 29 TABLES: 1 Income Deprivation at District Level in Tyne & Wear …………………………………….. 3 2 Income Deprivation Scores - Number of Wards in Tyne & Wear Within Each Band …….. 4 3 Income Deprivation Ranks - Number of Wards in Tyne & Wear Within Each Band ……... 4 4 The Most Income-Deprived Wards in Tyne & Wear ………………………………………. 5 5 The Least Income-Deprived Wards in Tyne & Wear ……………………………………… 5 6 Child Poverty at District Level in Tyne & Wear …………………………………………… 7 7 Child Poverty Scores - Number of Wards in Tyne & Wear Within Each Band …………… 7 8 Child Poverty Ranks - Number of Wards in Tyne & Wear Within Each Band ……………. 7 9 The Most Deprived Wards in Tyne & Wear in Terms of Child Poverty …………………... 8 10 The Least Deprived Wards in Tyne & Wear in Terms of Child Poverty …………………... 8 MAPS: Tyne & Wear Electoral Wards Key Map …………………………………………………... 9 1 Income Deprivation Scores, Tyne & Wear ………………………………………………… 10 Tyne & Wear Research and Information i Income Deprivation in Tyne & Wear 2 Income Deprivation Ranks, Tyne & Wear …………………………………………………. 10 3 Child Poverty Scores, Tyne & Wear ………………………………………………………. 11 4 Child Poverty Ranks, Tyne & Wear ………………………………………………………... 11 5 Income Deprivation Scores, Gateshead …………………………………………………….. 14 6 Income Deprivation Ranks, Gateshead …………………………………………………….. 14 7 Child Poverty Scores, Gateshead …………………………………………………………... 15 8 Child Poverty Ranks, Gateshead …………………………………………………………… 15 9 Income Deprivation Scores, Newcastle …………………………………………………….. 18 10 Income Deprivation Ranks, Newcastle …………………………………………………….. 18 11 Child Poverty Scores, Newcastle …………………………………………………………... 19 12 Child Poverty Ranks, Newcastle …………………………………………………………… 19 13 Income Deprivation Scores, North Tyneside ………………………………………………. 22 14 Income Deprivation Ranks, North Tyneside ……………………………………………….. 22 15 Child Poverty Scores, North Tyneside ……………………………………………………... 23 16 Child Poverty Ranks, North Tyneside ……………………………………………………… 23 17 Income Deprivation Scores, South Tyneside ………………………………………………. 26 18 Income Deprivation Ranks, South Tyneside ……………………………………………….. 26 19 Child Poverty Scores, South Tyneside ……………………………………………………... 27 20 Child Poverty Ranks, South Tyneside ……………………………………………………… 27 21 Income Deprivation Scores, Sunderland …………………………………………………… 30 22 Income Deprivation Ranks, Sunderland ……………………………………………………. 30 23 Child Poverty Scores, Sunderland ………………………………………………………….. 31 24 Child Poverty Ranks, Sunderland ………………………………………………………….. 31 APPENDIX TABLES: A1 Gateshead Ward IMD Income Domain and Child Poverty Scores and Ranks …………….. 32 A2 Newcastle Ward IMD Income Domain and Child Poverty Scores and Ranks .……………. 33 A3 North Tyneside Ward IMD Income Domain and Child Poverty Scores and Ranks ..……… 34 A4 South Tyneside Ward IMD Income Domain and Child Poverty Scores and Ranks ……….. 35 A5 Sunderland Ward IMD Income Domain and Child Poverty Scores and Ranks ……………. 36 ii Tyne & Wear Research and Information Income Deprivation in Tyne & Wear KEY POINTS The Index of Multiple Deprivation 2000 (IMD 2000) is a ward level index, combining information from six component parts or 'domains' of deprivation: Income, Employment, Health & Disability, Education, Housing and Geographical access to services (§1.1). This report focuses on Income deprivation and also covers the associated Child Poverty Index. Income Deprivation is defined as dependence on the four key means-tested benefits (Income Support, Jobseekers' Allowance - Income-based, Family Credit and Disability Working Allowance) or Council Tax Benefit for non-earning, non-IS pensioner and disabled households. The majority of benefits data mainly relates to 1998. The rest relates to 1999. The IMD scores for both Income Deprivation and the Child Poverty Index are percentage rates. Thus it is valid to say that a ward with a score of, say, 70%, is twice as deprived as one with a score of 35% (§1.1). The rates are best quoted as whole percentages (e.g. 70%). Although the DETR quotes the scores to two decimal places, these are estimates. Users should note that all rates depend on the accuracy of the ward population estimates. All these rates should be updateable with Census 2001 ward populations, when they become available. The North East is the region with the highest average rank of wards suffering multiple deprivation, with a mean ward rank of 2,279 (out of 8,414). The North East also has the largest percentage of its population (56%) living in the most deprived 20% of wards in England on the IMD (§2.0). The most income deprived ward in Tyne & Wear is Walker, Newcastle, with a score of 58%. The least deprived ward is Cleadon & East Boldon, South Tyneside, with a score of 7.7%. The average rate of income deprivation in Tyne & Wear is 31.5% (§2.1). In eight of the 113 wards in Tyne & Wear over 50% of the population are income deprived. Income deprivation is 50% or over in six of Newcastle's wards and one each in North Tyneside and Sunderland. South Tyneside and Gateshead have no wards with an income deprivation score of 50% or over (§2.1). The North East region has the highest percentage of children (42%) in families that claim means- tested benefits (§3.1). In Tyne & Wear, the ward with the highest rate of child poverty (85%) is West City (Newcastle). The least deprived ward is Jesmond (Newcastle). There is an 80 percentage point difference between the child poverty scores of these two wards. The average rate of child poverty in Tyne & Wear is 45% (§3.1). In fourteen wards in Tyne & Wear over 65% of children are living in poverty. Child poverty is over 65% in seven wards in Newcastle. Sunderland (4), North Tyneside (2), Gateshead (1) and South Tyneside no wards (§3.1). 41 wards in Tyne & Wear are in the top 10% most deprived wards in England, in terms of child poverty. Child poverty is within the most deprived 10% of wards in England, in ten Newcastle wards, nine Gateshead wards, almost one third of Sunderland wards (8), seven wards in North Tyneside and seven wards in South Tyneside (§3.1). Tyne & Wear Research and Information iii Income Deprivation in Tyne & Wear 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents an analysis of the Income Deprivation domain of the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) 2000 at ward level in Tyne & Wear. The IMD 2000 was published by the DETR, in August 2000. It reveals the extent of poverty, and particularly child poverty in Tyne & Wear. Townsend (19791) provided a definition of poverty in terms of relative deprivation: 'Individuals, families and groups can be said to be in poverty if they lack the resources to obtain the types of diet, participate in the activities and have the living conditions and amenities which are customary, or at least widely encouraged or approved in the societies to which they belong'. From this, and other work, Townsend has laid down the foundation for articulating multiple deprivation as an accumulation of single deprivations - this concept is further developed in the design of the IMD 2000. Income deprivation is considered one of the most important aspects of deprivation. In the UK, the number of people with relatively low incomes has more than doubled between the end of the 1970s and the beginning of the 1990s. This increase followed a period in the 1960s and 1970s during which the proportion of people with relatively low incomes remained broadly constant2. One of the main reasons for the increase has been the growth in the number of working-age households where no one is in employment. This has doubled since the end of the 1970s. The proportion peaked in 1996 at 18.9% but by spring 1998 had declined to 17.7%3. The growth of these ‘work-less households’ has been driven by a decline in male employment rates and also by an increase in the number of single adult, including lone parent, households. In addition, employed people have become concentrated in fewer households; the rise in women's employment