Summary

Description

Deprivation score for each LSOA in the Crime domain. The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2010 indices are for the year 2008. The indices have been constructed by the Social Disadvantage Research Centre at the University of Oxford for the Department for Communities and Local Government. All figures can only be reproduced if the source (Department for Communities and Local Government, Indices of Deprivation 2010) is fully acknowledged. The domains used in the Indices of Deprivation 2010 are: income deprivation; employment deprivation; health deprivation and disability; education deprivation; crime deprivation; barriers to housing and services deprivation; and living environment deprivation. Each of these domains has its own scores and ranks, allowing users to focus on specific aspects of deprivation. Because the indices give a relative measure, they can tell you if one area is more deprived than another but not by how much. For example, if an area has a rank of 40 it is not half as deprived as a place with a rank of 20. The Index of Multiple Deprivation was constructed by combining scores from the seven domains. When comparing areas, a higher deprivation score indicates a higher proportion of people living there who are classed as deprived. But as for ranks, deprivation scores can only tell you if one area is more deprived than another, but not by how much. This dataset was created from a spreadsheet provided by the Department of Communities and Local Government, which can be downloaded [here](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-indices-of-deprivation-2010). The method for calculating the IMD score and underlying indicators is detailed in the report '[The English Indices of Deprivation 2010: Technical Report](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-indices-of-deprivation-2010-technical-report)'. The data is represented here as Linked Data, using the Data Cube ontology.

Summary

Description

Ranking of LSOAs according to their score in the Crime domain. The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2010 indices are for the year 2008. The indices have been constructed by the Social Disadvantage Research Centre at the University of Oxford for the Department for Communities and Local Government. All figures can only be reproduced if the source (Department for Communities and Local Government, Indices of Deprivation 2010) is fully acknowledged. The domains used in the Indices of Deprivation 2010 are: income deprivation; employment deprivation; health deprivation and disability; education deprivation; crime deprivation; barriers to housing and services deprivation; and living environment deprivation. Each of these domains has its own scores and ranks, allowing users to focus on specific aspects of deprivation. Because the indices give a relative measure, they can tell you if one area is more deprived than another but not by how much. For example, if an area has a rank of 40 it is not half as deprived as a place with a rank of 20. The Index of Multiple Deprivation was constructed by combining scores from the seven domains. When comparing areas, a higher deprivation score indicates a higher proportion of people living there who are classed as deprived. But as for ranks, deprivation scores can only tell you if one area is more deprived than another, but not by how much. This dataset was created from a spreadsheet provided by the Department of Communities and Local Government, which can be downloaded [here](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-indices-of-deprivation-2010). The method for calculating the IMD score and underlying indicators is detailed in the report '[The English Indices of Deprivation 2010: Technical Report](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-indices-of-deprivation-2010-technical-report)'. The data is represented here as Linked Data, using the Data Cube ontology.

Summary

Description

This dataset contains a summary measure of the Indices of Deprivation 2010 Health and disability domain at local authority district level. It puts the 326 Local Authority Districts into a rank order based the population weighted average rank of all LSOAs in the LAD. A rank of 1 is the most deprived. The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2010 indices are for the year 2008. The Indices are designed for small areas, but one way of summarising relative deprivation at local authority level is by calculating the average rank of the LSOAs within it. For the IMD and each domain, the summary measure is calculated by averaging all of the LSOA ranks in each local authority district. For the purpose of calculation, LSOAs are ranked such that the most deprived LSOA is given the rank of 32,482. The LSOA ranks are population weighted within a local authority district to take account of the fact that LSOA size can vary. (For simplicity in summarising the domains, the same total population size is used for all domains.) Finally the LADs are ranked according to the average rank of the LSOAs, from 1 to 326 where 1 is the most deprived. The ‘Rank of average rank’ summary measure of for local authorities is also published for the IMD at: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/xls/1871689.xls](http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/xls/1871689.xls).

Summary

Description

Percentage of Troubled Families local authorities have identified and are committed to working with #### How the figure is calculated: The figure is the number of all troubled families that have been identified by upper tier local authorities to date given as a percentage of all families that authorities pledged to turn around (as indicated in the published data - see link below). #### Why is this indicator in the business plan? The indicator is a measure of the progress being made by local authorities at this early stage of the Troubled Families Programme. Identifying the real names and addresses and all the various family members of families that are right for this programme is not always easy as we have targeted families for the first time whose range of problems will often cut across education, crime, worklessness and other issues. This involves lots of different local agencies sharing information and making an assessment about whether families they're individually working with are the right ones for this programme. #### How often is it updated? Data is updated quarterly. ####Where does the data come from? Self-declarations by local authorities, which are provided to the DCLG Troubled Families Team. #### What area does the headline figure cover? England #### Are further breakdowns of the data available? By local authority. For data at local authority level see: [https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/troubled-families-progress-information-at-30-june-2013-and-families-turned-around-at-29-july-2013](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/troubled-families-progress-information-at-30-june-2013-and-families-turned-around-at-29-july-2013) #### What does a change in this indicator show? These figures show the extent of progress in Local Authorities working towards their commitments for the programme. They come less than 13 months after the start of the programme and show that councils are on course to meet the Prime Minister's target. We expect the figure to increase towards 100%, but we are not expecting local areas to identify all the families they will work with over the course of a 3 year programme at the start of that programme - as family circumstances may change by the time they are approached to be worked with. #### Time Lag 2 months #### Next available update To be confirmed. #### Type of Data Management Information #### Robustness and data limitations - #### Links to Further Information [https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/helping-troubled-families-turn-their-lives-around](https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/helping-troubled-families-turn-their-lives-around) #### Contact Details [CorporatePerformance@communities.gsi.gov.uk](mailto:CorporatePerformance@communities.gsi.gov.uk)

Summary

Description

This dataset contains the scores underlying the Index of Multiple Deprivation, 2010. These figures combine values of many indicators into a single score that indicates the overall level of deprivation in each LSOA. A high number indicates a high level of deprivation. The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2010 indices are for the year 2008. The indices have been constructed by the Social Disadvantage Research Centre at the University of Oxford for the Department for Communities and Local Government. All figures can only be reproduced if the source (Department for Communities and Local Government, Indices of Deprivation 2010) is fully acknowledged. The domains used in the Indices of Deprivation 2010 are: income deprivation; employment deprivation; health deprivation and disability; education deprivation; crime deprivation; barriers to housing and services deprivation; and living environment deprivation. Each of these domains has its own scores and ranks, allowing users to focus on specific aspects of deprivation. Because the indices give a relative measure, they can tell you if one area is more deprived than another but not by how much. For example, if an area has a rank of 40 it is not half as deprived as a place with a rank of 20. The Index of Multiple Deprivation was constructed by combining scores from the seven domains. When comparing areas, a higher deprivation score indicates a higher proportion of people living there who are classed as deprived. But as for ranks, deprivation scores can only tell you if one area is more deprived than another, but not by how much. This dataset was created from a spreadsheet provided by the Department of Communities and Local Government, which can be downloaded [here](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-indices-of-deprivation-2010). The method for calculating the IMD score and underlying indicators is detailed in the report '[The English Indices of Deprivation 2010: Technical Report](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-indices-of-deprivation-2010-technical-report)'. The data is represented here as Linked Data, using the Data Cube ontology.

Summary

Description

Percentage of local planning authorities having an adopted local plan #### How the figure is calculated: It is the number of Local Planning Authorities with an adopted plan as a percentage of total number of Local Planning Authorities. #### Why is this indicator in the business plan? Adopted local plans are essential for a 'plan led' system whereby planning permissions are generally granted for developments in accordance with the plan #### How often is it updated? The figure is derived from data reported by PINS during the last quarterly period, however the PINS published database for strategic issues/'core strategies' Local Plans progress is updated online in real time. ####Where does the data come from? Monitoring information which feeds into the business plan indicator of Local Plan adoption is generated by the Planning Inspectorate (who are responsible for independently examining Local Plans on behalf of the Secretary of State). It is established protocol that this information is passed to DCLG on a fortnightly basis. This information feeds the team's monitoring information and in turn feeds the Business Plan indicator, which is updated quarterly. #### What area does the headline figure cover? England #### Are further breakdowns of the data available? By size of authority, type of authority, urban/rural classification of authority #### What does a change in this indicator show? Local Plans help local authorities to plan positively for the future. We would expect to see the proportion of local authorities with adopted plans to increase. #### Time Lag See Robustness and data limitations below. #### Next available update January 2015. #### Type of Data Management information #### Robustness and data limitations The Planning Inspectorate collect the information as part of its work in examining Local Plans. This means they will know when a local plan has been found sound. Although LPAs should inform the Planning Inspectorate when a Local Plan is adopted, in practice there can be a delay of several months before this information is recorded. Therefore data will be subject to revisions, however, as the number of adoptions every month is very low, this does not have a significant impact on the overall percentage of adopted plans. #### Links to Further Information See: Preparation and Monitoring of Local Plans: strategic issues/'core strategies' [here](http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/planning/planningsystem/localplans). #### Contact Details [CorporatePerformance@communities.gsi.gov.uk](mailto:CorporatePerformance@communities.gsi.gov.uk)

Summary

Description

This dataset contains a summary measure of the Indices of Deprivation 2010 Barriers to housing and services domain at local authority district level. It puts the 326 Local Authority Districts into a rank order based the population weighted average rank of all LSOAs in the LAD. A rank of 1 is the most deprived. The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2010 indices are for the year 2008. The Indices are designed for small areas, but one way of summarising relative deprivation at local authority level is by calculating the average rank of the LSOAs within it. For the IMD and each domain, the summary measure is calculated by averaging all of the LSOA ranks in each local authority district. For the purpose of calculation, LSOAs are ranked such that the most deprived LSOA is given the rank of 32,482. The LSOA ranks are population weighted within a local authority district to take account of the fact that LSOA size can vary. (For simplicity in summarising the domains, the same total population size is used for all domains.) Finally the LADs are ranked according to the average rank of the LSOAs, from 1 to 326 where 1 is the most deprived. The ‘Rank of average rank’ summary measure of for local authorities is also published for the IMD at: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/xls/1871689.xls](http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/xls/1871689.xls).

Summary

Description

The number of planning applications granted as a percentage of all major and minor schemes #### How the figure is calculated: The number of planning applications for major or minor schemes granted within the reporting period; divided by the total number of planning applications for major or minor schemes on which a decision was made within the same period; multiplied by 100. A major development is one where the number of residential dwelling units to be constructed is 10 or more, or where the number of residential units is not given then the site area is 0.5 hectares or more. For all other uses a major development is one where the floor space to be built is 1,000 square metres or more, or where the site area is 1 hectare or more. For dwellings, minor development is one where the number of dwellings to be constructed is between 1 and 9 inclusive, or where the site area is less than 0.5 hectares. For all other uses, a minor development is one where the floor space to be built is less than 1,000 square metres or where the site area is less than 1 hectare. Other Developments include: * Minerals e.g. Mineral handling installations, bricks/pottery manufacture, pipelines, conveyors * Change of use (outside of major and minor developments), or permitted developments with change of use. * Householder developments within the curtilage of residential e.g. extensions, alterations, garages, swimming pools, walls, fences, vehicular accesses, porches and satellite dishes. * Advertisement displays * Listed building consents (to alter/extend/demolish) * Certificates of lawful development * Notifications #### Why is this indicator in the business plan? This provides a proxy measure for the impact of the planning measures in the Growth Review. It covers the types of development that are most closely associated with growth. #### How often is it updated? Quarterly ####Where does the data come from? PSF returns from planning authorities. Published figures are in Table P131 at [https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/live-tables-on-planning-application-statistics](https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/live-tables-on-planning-application-statistics). #### What area does the headline figure cover? England #### Are further breakdowns of the data available? By local planning authority #### What does a change in this indicator show? A change in this indicator would show a change in the overall level of approvals. We would not expect this to reach 100% as this would indicate all applications being accepted. A high and consistent approval rate would indicate good performance. #### Time Lag Published within three months of the end of the reporting period. #### Next available update December 2014. #### Type of Data National Statistics #### Robustness and data limitations The returns submitted by local planning authorities undergo thorough validation and checks. Inconsistent data highlighted during validation and checks are verified by contacting the local authority. Late returns are pursued to ensure the overall response rate is as high as possible. Where a response rate of 100% is not achieved estimates are imputed for non-responding authorities. Imputation is carried out for non-responding authorities and is calculated using historical information. The process is carried out within groups of authorities which are categorised by their location. The imputed estimates are aggregated together with information from those authorities who responded to calculate the England level information. #### Links to Further Information [https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-communities-and-local-government/series/planning-applications-statistics](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-communities-and-local-government/series/planning-applications-statistics) #### Contact Details [CorporatePerformance@communities.gsi.gov.uk](mailto:CorporatePerformance@communities.gsi.gov.uk)

Summary

Description

This dataset contains a summary measure of the Indices of Deprivation 2010 Education, skills and training domain at local authority district level. It puts the 326 Local Authority Districts into a rank order based the population weighted average rank of all LSOAs in the LAD. A rank of 1 is the most deprived. The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2010 indices are for the year 2008. The Indices are designed for small areas, but one way of summarising relative deprivation at local authority level is by calculating the average rank of the LSOAs within it. For the IMD and each domain, the summary measure is calculated by averaging all of the LSOA ranks in each local authority district. For the purpose of calculation, LSOAs are ranked such that the most deprived LSOA is given the rank of 32,482. The LSOA ranks are population weighted within a local authority district to take account of the fact that LSOA size can vary. (For simplicity in summarising the domains, the same total population size is used for all domains.) Finally the LADs are ranked according to the average rank of the LSOAs, from 1 to 326 where 1 is the most deprived. The ‘Rank of average rank’ summary measure of for local authorities is also published for the IMD at: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/xls/1871689.xls](http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/xls/1871689.xls).

Summary

Description

This dataset contains the main ranking for the Index of Multiple Deprivation, 2007. This dataset puts the 32,482 LSOAs into a rank order based on their 2007 IMD score. A rank of 1 is the most deprived. The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2007 indices are for the year 2005. The indices have been constructed by the Social Disadvantage Research Centre at the University of Oxford for the Department for Communities and Local Government. All figures can only be reproduced if the source (Department for Communities and Local Government, Indices of Deprivation 2007) is fully acknowledged. The domains used in the Indices of Deprivation 2007 are: income deprivation; employment deprivation; health deprivation and disability; education deprivation; crime deprivation; barriers to housing and services deprivation; and living environment deprivation. Each of these domains has its own scores and ranks, allowing users to focus on specific aspects of deprivation. Because the indices give a relative measure, they can tell you if one area is more deprived than another but not by how much. For example, if an area has a rank of 40 it is not half as deprived as a place with a rank of 20. The Index of Multiple Deprivation was constructed by combining scores from the seven domains. When comparing areas, a higher deprivation score indicates a higher proportion of people living there who are classed as deprived. But as for ranks, deprivation scores can only tell you if one area is more deprived than another, but not by how much. This dataset was created from a spreadsheet provided by the Department of Communities and Local Government, which can be downloaded [here](http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100410180038/http://communities.gov.uk/communities/neighbourhoodrenewal/deprivation/deprivation07/). The method for calculating the IMD score and underlying indicators is detailed in the [Guidance document](http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100410180038/http://communities.gov.uk/documents/communities/doc/615986.doc). The data is represented here as Linked Data, using the Data Cube ontology.

Summary

Description

This dataset contains a summary measure of the Index of Multiple Deprivation 2010 at local authority district level. It puts the 326 Local Authority Districts into a rank order based the population weighted average rank of all LSOAs in the LAD. A rank of 1 is the most deprived. The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2010 indices are for the year 2008. The Indices are designed for small areas, but one way of summarising relative deprivation at local authority level is by calculating the average rank of the LSOAs within it. For the IMD and each domain, the summary measure is calculated by averaging all of the LSOA ranks in each local authority district. For the purpose of calculation, LSOAs are ranked such that the most deprived LSOA is given the rank of 32,482. The LSOA ranks are population weighted within a local authority district to take account of the fact that LSOA size can vary. (For simplicity in summarising the domains, the same total population size is used for all domains.) Finally the LADs are ranked according to the average rank of the LSOAs, from 1 to 326 where 1 is the most deprived. The ‘Rank of average rank’ summary measure of for local authorities is also published for the IMD at: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/xls/1871689.xls](http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/xls/1871689.xls).

Summary

Description

Number of areas designated by the relevant local authority for Neighbourhood Plans #### How the figure is calculated: The figure is a count of communities that have applied and been designated by their local authorities as neighbourhood planning areas: the first legal step in the production of a neighbourhood plan. #### Why is this indicator in the business plan? The Localism Act, which received Royal Assent on November 15 2011, introduced new rights and powers to allow local communities to shape new development by coming together to prepare neighbourhood plans. Neighbourhood planning can be taken forward by town and parish councils or in unparished areas by neighbourhood forums. An existing or new community group, representative of the area and with at least 21 members can apply and be designated by the local authority as a neighbourhood forum. Neighbourhood forums and parish councils can use new neighbourhood planning powers to establish policies for the development and use of land in a neighbourhood planning area or to permit the development they want to see without the need for further planning applications. They can decide where new homes and offices should be built and what they should look like. The plan can allocate sites for development, provide general guidelines, and have any number of policies depending what local people want. The neighbourhood planning process has five stages: * Designating the neighbourhood area and (in unparished areas) forum. * Preparing the plan * Consulting on a draft version (6-weeks pre-submission consultation) * Independent check of the plan after a further 6 weeks publicity * Community referendum. If more than 50% voters agree, the plan is made part of the local plan and has legal force #### How often is it updated? Monthly #### Where does the data come from? Data is collected by DCLG from automatic reporting of updates to local authority websites. #### What area does the headline figure cover? England #### Are further breakdowns of the data available? No #### What does a change in this indicator show? We would expect to see the number of areas designated to increase as the figures are cumulative and once an area is designated it does not lose its designation. Since December 2012, we have seen an average of around 46 areas designated per month, although this figure does vary between months #### Time Lag Time lag is minimal but there will be an element of lag between the time an area is designated and the point at which a local authority updates their website: from days to weeks. #### Next available update Around first Friday of each month. #### Type of Data Management information #### Robustness and data limitations Numbers are as reported by local authorities and may be higher where authorities have not yet updated websites. #### Links to Further Information [https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/giving-communities-more-power-in-planning-local-development/supporting-pages/neighbourhood-planning http://mycommunityrights.org.uk/neighbourhood-planning/](https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/giving-communities-more-power-in-planning-local-development/supporting-pages/neighbourhood-planning http://mycommunityrights.org.uk/neighbourhood-planning/) #### Contact Details [CorporatePerformance@communities.gsi.gov.uk](mailto:CorporatePerformance@communities.gsi.gov.uk)

Summary

Description

Ranking of LSOAs according to their score in the Education, Skills and Training Deprivation domain. The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2010 indices are for the year 2008. The indices have been constructed by the Social Disadvantage Research Centre at the University of Oxford for the Department for Communities and Local Government. All figures can only be reproduced if the source (Department for Communities and Local Government, Indices of Deprivation 2010) is fully acknowledged. The domains used in the Indices of Deprivation 2010 are: income deprivation; employment deprivation; health deprivation and disability; education deprivation; crime deprivation; barriers to housing and services deprivation; and living environment deprivation. Each of these domains has its own scores and ranks, allowing users to focus on specific aspects of deprivation. Because the indices give a relative measure, they can tell you if one area is more deprived than another but not by how much. For example, if an area has a rank of 40 it is not half as deprived as a place with a rank of 20. The Index of Multiple Deprivation was constructed by combining scores from the seven domains. When comparing areas, a higher deprivation score indicates a higher proportion of people living there who are classed as deprived. But as for ranks, deprivation scores can only tell you if one area is more deprived than another, but not by how much. This dataset was created from a spreadsheet provided by the Department of Communities and Local Government, which can be downloaded [here](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-indices-of-deprivation-2010). The method for calculating the IMD score and underlying indicators is detailed in the report '[The English Indices of Deprivation 2010: Technical Report](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-indices-of-deprivation-2010-technical-report)'. The data is represented here as Linked Data, using the Data Cube ontology.

Summary

Description

This dataset contains a summary measure of the Indices of Deprivation 2010 Income domain at local authority district level. It puts the 326 Local Authority Districts into a rank order based the population weighted average rank of all LSOAs in the LAD. A rank of 1 is the most deprived. The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2010 indices are for the year 2008. The Indices are designed for small areas, but one way of summarising relative deprivation at local authority level is by calculating the average rank of the LSOAs within it. For the IMD and each domain, the summary measure is calculated by averaging all of the LSOA ranks in each local authority district. For the purpose of calculation, LSOAs are ranked such that the most deprived LSOA is given the rank of 32,482. The LSOA ranks are population weighted within a local authority district to take account of the fact that LSOA size can vary. (For simplicity in summarising the domains, the same total population size is used for all domains.) Finally the LADs are ranked according to the average rank of the LSOAs, from 1 to 326 where 1 is the most deprived. The ‘Rank of average rank’ summary measure of for local authorities is also published for the IMD at: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/xls/1871689.xls](http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/xls/1871689.xls).

Summary

Description

This dataset contains a summary measure of the Indices of Deprivation 2010 Employment domain at local authority district level. It puts the 326 Local Authority Districts into a rank order based the population weighted average rank of all LSOAs in the LAD. A rank of 1 is the most deprived. The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2010 indices are for the year 2008. The Indices are designed for small areas, but one way of summarising relative deprivation at local authority level is by calculating the average rank of the LSOAs within it. For the IMD and each domain, the summary measure is calculated by averaging all of the LSOA ranks in each local authority district. For the purpose of calculation, LSOAs are ranked such that the most deprived LSOA is given the rank of 32,482. The LSOA ranks are population weighted within a local authority district to take account of the fact that LSOA size can vary. (For simplicity in summarising the domains, the same total population size is used for all domains.) Finally the LADs are ranked according to the average rank of the LSOAs, from 1 to 326 where 1 is the most deprived. The ‘Rank of average rank’ summary measure of for local authorities is also published for the IMD at: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/xls/1871689.xls](http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/xls/1871689.xls).

Summary

Description

This dataset contains a summary measure of the Indices of Deprivation 2010 Living environment domain at local authority district level. It puts the 326 Local Authority Districts into a rank order based the population weighted average rank of all LSOAs in the LAD. A rank of 1 is the most deprived. The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2010 indices are for the year 2008. The Indices are designed for small areas, but one way of summarising relative deprivation at local authority level is by calculating the average rank of the LSOAs within it. For the IMD and each domain, the summary measure is calculated by averaging all of the LSOA ranks in each local authority district. For the purpose of calculation, LSOAs are ranked such that the most deprived LSOA is given the rank of 32,482. The LSOA ranks are population weighted within a local authority district to take account of the fact that LSOA size can vary. (For simplicity in summarising the domains, the same total population size is used for all domains.) Finally the LADs are ranked according to the average rank of the LSOAs, from 1 to 326 where 1 is the most deprived. The ‘Rank of average rank’ summary measure of for local authorities is also published for the IMD at: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/xls/1871689.xls](http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/xls/1871689.xls).

Summary

Description

Total number of housing starts (seasonally adjusted) #### How the figure is calculated: Total housing starts are reported by local authority and private building control organisations after the end of each quarter. A start is counted from the point at which foundation work begins. The figures are seasonally adjusted to allow comparisons with previous quarters. #### Why is this indicator in the business plan? Increasing the supply of housing is a key part of DCLG policy. The house building figures are the most frequent and timely indicator of housing delivery. #### How often is it updated? Quarterly ####Where does the data come from? P2 quarterly house building returns by local authority building control departments; monthly information from the National House Building Council (NHBC) on the volume of building control inspections; and a quarterly survey of private building control companies. Published figures are at [https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-communities-and-local-government/series/house-building-statistics](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-communities-and-local-government/series/house-building-statistics). #### What area does the headline figure cover? England #### Are further breakdowns of the data available? Yes, can be split by local authority area and by tenure #### What does a change in this indicator show? An increase in this indicator is good and shows more new houses are being started. #### Time Lag Figures are published within two months of the end of the reporting period. #### Next available update November 2014. #### Type of Data National Statistics. #### Robustness and data limitations The P2 figures from local authorities and figures from private building control companies include imputation for a small number of missing returns. Seasonal factors for the house building time series are re-calculated annually back to 2000. This is usually done in the second quarter of the calendar year. Therefore the seasonally adjusted house building figures throughout the whole period change slightly at that time but are not marked as 'revised'. #### Links to Further Information [https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-communities-and-local-government/series/house-building-statistics](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-communities-and-local-government/series/house-building-statistics) #### Contact Details [CorporatePerformance@communities.gsi.gov.uk](mailto:CorporatePerformance@communities.gsi.gov.uk)

Summary

Description

This dataset contains a summary measure of the Indices of Deprivation 2010 Crime domain at local authority district level. It puts the 326 Local Authority Districts into a rank order based the population weighted average rank of all LSOAs in the LAD. A rank of 1 is the most deprived. The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2010 indices are for the year 2008. The Indices are designed for small areas, but one way of summarising relative deprivation at local authority level is by calculating the average rank of the LSOAs within it. For the IMD and each domain, the summary measure is calculated by averaging all of the LSOA ranks in each local authority district. For the purpose of calculation, LSOAs are ranked such that the most deprived LSOA is given the rank of 32,482. The LSOA ranks are population weighted within a local authority district to take account of the fact that LSOA size can vary. (For simplicity in summarising the domains, the same total population size is used for all domains.) Finally the LADs are ranked according to the average rank of the LSOAs, from 1 to 326 where 1 is the most deprived. The ‘Rank of average rank’ summary measure of for local authorities is also published for the IMD at: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/xls/1871689.xls](http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/xls/1871689.xls).

Summary

Description

This dataset contains the main ranking for the Index of Multiple Deprivation, 2010. This dataset puts the 32,482 LSOAs into a rank order based on their 2010 IMD score. A rank of 1 is the most deprived. The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2010 indices are for the year 2008. The indices have been constructed by the Social Disadvantage Research Centre at the University of Oxford for the Department for Communities and Local Government. All figures can only be reproduced if the source (Department for Communities and Local Government, Indices of Deprivation 2010) is fully acknowledged. The domains used in the Indices of Deprivation 2010 are: income deprivation; employment deprivation; health deprivation and disability; education deprivation; crime deprivation; barriers to housing and services deprivation; and living environment deprivation. Each of these domains has its own scores and ranks, allowing users to focus on specific aspects of deprivation. Because the indices give a relative measure, they can tell you if one area is more deprived than another but not by how much. For example, if an area has a rank of 40 it is not half as deprived as a place with a rank of 20. The Index of Multiple Deprivation was constructed by combining scores from the seven domains. When comparing areas, a higher deprivation score indicates a higher proportion of people living there who are classed as deprived. But as for ranks, deprivation scores can only tell you if one area is more deprived than another, but not by how much. This dataset was created from a spreadsheet provided by the Department of Communities and Local Government, which can be downloaded [here](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-indices-of-deprivation-2010). The method for calculating the IMD score and underlying indicators is detailed in the report '[The English Indices of Deprivation 2010: Technical Report](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-indices-of-deprivation-2010-technical-report)'. The data is represented here as Linked Data, using the Data Cube ontology.

Summary

Description

Ranking of LSOAs according to their score in the Barriers to Housing and Services domain. The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2010 indices are for the year 2008. The indices have been constructed by the Social Disadvantage Research Centre at the University of Oxford for the Department for Communities and Local Government. All figures can only be reproduced if the source (Department for Communities and Local Government, Indices of Deprivation 2010) is fully acknowledged. The domains used in the Indices of Deprivation 2010 are: income deprivation; employment deprivation; health deprivation and disability; education deprivation; crime deprivation; barriers to housing and services deprivation; and living environment deprivation. Each of these domains has its own scores and ranks, allowing users to focus on specific aspects of deprivation. Because the indices give a relative measure, they can tell you if one area is more deprived than another but not by how much. For example, if an area has a rank of 40 it is not half as deprived as a place with a rank of 20. The Index of Multiple Deprivation was constructed by combining scores from the seven domains. When comparing areas, a higher deprivation score indicates a higher proportion of people living there who are classed as deprived. But as for ranks, deprivation scores can only tell you if one area is more deprived than another, but not by how much. This dataset was created from a spreadsheet provided by the Department of Communities and Local Government, which can be downloaded [here](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-indices-of-deprivation-2010). The method for calculating the IMD score and underlying indicators is detailed in the report '[The English Indices of Deprivation 2010: Technical Report](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-indices-of-deprivation-2010-technical-report)'. The data is represented here as Linked Data, using the Data Cube ontology.

Summary

Description

This dataset contains the scores underlying the Index of Multiple Deprivation, 2007. These figures combine values of many indicators into a single score that indicates the overall level of deprivation in each LSOA. A high number indicates a high level of deprivation. The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2007 indices are for the year 2005. The indices have been constructed by the Social Disadvantage Research Centre at the University of Oxford for the Department for Communities and Local Government. All figures can only be reproduced if the source (Department for Communities and Local Government, Indices of Deprivation 2007) is fully acknowledged. The domains used in the Indices of Deprivation 2007 are: income deprivation; employment deprivation; health deprivation and disability; education deprivation; crime deprivation; barriers to housing and services deprivation; and living environment deprivation. Each of these domains has its own scores and ranks, allowing users to focus on specific aspects of deprivation. Because the indices give a relative measure, they can tell you if one area is more deprived than another but not by how much. For example, if an area has a rank of 40 it is not half as deprived as a place with a rank of 20. The Index of Multiple Deprivation was constructed by combining scores from the seven domains. When comparing areas, a higher deprivation score indicates a higher proportion of people living there who are classed as deprived. But as for ranks, deprivation scores can only tell you if one area is more deprived than another, but not by how much. This dataset was created from a spreadsheet provided by the Department of Communities and Local Government, which can be downloaded [here](http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100410180038/http://communities.gov.uk/communities/neighbourhoodrenewal/deprivation/deprivation07/). The method for calculating the IMD score and underlying indicators is detailed in the [Guidance document](http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100410180038/http://communities.gov.uk/documents/communities/doc/615986.doc). The data is represented here as Linked Data, using the Data Cube ontology.

Summary

Description

Score for each LSOA in the Income Deprivation domain. The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2010 indices are for the year 2008. The indices have been constructed by the Social Disadvantage Research Centre at the University of Oxford for the Department for Communities and Local Government. All figures can only be reproduced if the source (Department for Communities and Local Government, Indices of Deprivation 2010) is fully acknowledged. The domains used in the Indices of Deprivation 2010 are: income deprivation; employment deprivation; health deprivation and disability; education deprivation; crime deprivation; barriers to housing and services deprivation; and living environment deprivation. Each of these domains has its own scores and ranks, allowing users to focus on specific aspects of deprivation. Because the indices give a relative measure, they can tell you if one area is more deprived than another but not by how much. For example, if an area has a rank of 40 it is not half as deprived as a place with a rank of 20. The Index of Multiple Deprivation was constructed by combining scores from the seven domains. When comparing areas, a higher deprivation score indicates a higher proportion of people living there who are classed as deprived. But as for ranks, deprivation scores can only tell you if one area is more deprived than another, but not by how much. This dataset was created from a spreadsheet provided by the Department of Communities and Local Government, which can be downloaded [here](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-indices-of-deprivation-2010). The method for calculating the IMD score and underlying indicators is detailed in the report '[The English Indices of Deprivation 2010: Technical Report](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-indices-of-deprivation-2010-technical-report)'. The data is represented here as Linked Data, using the Data Cube ontology.

Summary

Description

Expenditure per head on the Fire and Rescue Service #### How the figure is calculated: England total net current expenditure on the Fire and Rescue Service, divided by the mid-year population estimate for England. #### Why is this indicator in the business plan? This demonstrates the cost per head of providing the Fire and Rescue Service and will indicate over time whether the cost is going up or down. This indicator is of total revenue expenditure because the funding from the Department cannot be disaggregated from the total Fire and Rescue funding, which also includes locally raised funds, such as council tax. #### How often is it updated? Annually. A provisional figure will initially be released followed by a revised final outturn figure approximately three months later. #### Where does the data come from? The indicator is derived from two sources: The total expenditure figure is sourced from revenue summary returns to DCLG. Published figures are at [https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-communities-and-local-government/series/local-authority-revenue-expenditure-and-financing](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-communities-and-local-government/series/local-authority-revenue-expenditure-and-financing). The ONS population estimates that are used to derive a per head estimate are available at [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/taxonomy/index.html?nscl=Population](http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/taxonomy/index.html?nscl=Population). #### What area does the headline figure cover? England. #### Are further breakdowns of the data available? Yes, can be split by Fire and Rescue Authority. #### What does a change in this indicator show? A decreasing figure will indicate that expenditure on the Fire and Rescue Service is falling, per head of population. For 2011-12, total expenditure also fell, while the population of England rose. #### Time Lag Provisional figures published within five months of end of the reporting period, with final figures being published within eight months of end of the reporting period. #### Next available update August 2014 - Provisional figure for 2013-14 #### Type of Data National Statistics. #### Robustness and data limitations The expenditure figures are subjected to rigorous pre-defined validation tests both within the relevant form itself, while the form is being completed by the authority, and also as the data are received and stored. Population figures are the definitive mid-year estimates published by ONS. #### Links to Further Information [https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-communities-and-local-government/series/local-authority-revenue-expenditure-and-financing](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-communities-and-local-government/series/local-authority-revenue-expenditure-and-financing) #### Contact Details [CorporatePerformance@communities.gsi.gov.uk](mailto:CorporatePerformance@communities.gsi.gov.uk)

Summary

Description

Score for each LSOA in the Barriers to Housing and Services domain. The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2010 indices are for the year 2008. The indices have been constructed by the Social Disadvantage Research Centre at the University of Oxford for the Department for Communities and Local Government. All figures can only be reproduced if the source (Department for Communities and Local Government, Indices of Deprivation 2010) is fully acknowledged. The domains used in the Indices of Deprivation 2010 are: income deprivation; employment deprivation; health deprivation and disability; education deprivation; crime deprivation; barriers to housing and services deprivation; and living environment deprivation. Each of these domains has its own scores and ranks, allowing users to focus on specific aspects of deprivation. Because the indices give a relative measure, they can tell you if one area is more deprived than another but not by how much. For example, if an area has a rank of 40 it is not half as deprived as a place with a rank of 20. The Index of Multiple Deprivation was constructed by combining scores from the seven domains. When comparing areas, a higher deprivation score indicates a higher proportion of people living there who are classed as deprived. But as for ranks, deprivation scores can only tell you if one area is more deprived than another, but not by how much. This dataset was created from a spreadsheet provided by the Department of Communities and Local Government, which can be downloaded [here](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-indices-of-deprivation-2010). The method for calculating the IMD score and underlying indicators is detailed in the report '[The English Indices of Deprivation 2010: Technical Report](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-indices-of-deprivation-2010-technical-report)'. The data is represented here as Linked Data, using the Data Cube ontology.

Summary

Description

This is the Total New Homes Bonus grant payable for a financial year, divided by number of dwellings rewarded. Calculations are available separately for shire areas, metropolitan areas and London. #### How the figure is calculated: For 2011-12: average grant payable in areas equals the total payment for increase in effective stock divided by the increase in the number of dwellings comprising the effective stock. Where the effective stock is defined as dwellings on the valuation list less recent demolitions less long-term empty homes. Growth in the effective stock is measured from October to October. #### Why is this indicator in the business plan? It is a measure of the financial reward for housing growth provided through the New Homes Bonus. This is a key DCLG policy. #### How often is it updated? Annually #### Where does the data come from? Council Tax Base returns. Published figures are available [here](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-communities-and-local-government/series/council-taxbase-statistics). #### What area does the headline figure cover? England #### Are further breakdowns of the data available? Yes, can be split by Housing Authority area. #### What does a change in this indicator show? An increase in the average NHB grant payable may reflect an increase (i) in the proportion of homes receiving an affordable homes premium, (ii) a shift in distribution of homes awarded NHB at higher tax bands or (iii) an increase in the average national level of council tax for band D property (11 pence between 11/12 and 12/13). #### Time Lag Figures are published in advance of the financial year: initial figures in December and final figures in the February. #### Next available update Spring 2013 #### Type of Data Official Statistics #### Robustness and data limitations The data used in calculating the New Homes Bonus are also used in calculating each local authority's Council Tax Base for Formula Grant purposes so this effectively ensures a 100% response rate before the release is compiled. Figures are subjected to rigorous pre-defined validation tests both within the form itself, while the form is being completed by the authority, and also in DCLG when the data are received and stored. #### Links to Further Information [https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/new-homes-bonus-final-scheme-design--2](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/new-homes-bonus-final-scheme-design--2) #### Contact Details [CorporatePerformance@communities.gsi.gov.uk](mailto:CorporatePerformance@communities.gsi.gov.uk)