www.scotland.gov.uk/simd simd 2009 – technical aspects and use of the index matt perkins and...

www.scotland.gov.uk/simd

SIMD 2009 – technical aspects and use of the

index

Matt Perkins and Andrew White

Office of the Chief Statistician

Scottish Government

5th February 2010


SIMD 2009 – technical aspects and use of the index

• Technical Aspects of SIMD– SIMD history– Domains and indicators– Methodology

• Using the SIMD– Where to find things– How to use the SIMD– Example

• Work in development


SIMD History -SIMD 2004• Work done in house (with some SDRC help)• Datazone geography• 6 aspects of deprivation (domains)

– Income – Employment– Health– Education– Access– Housing

• Data from 2001 and 2002


SIMD 2006• Evaluation of Statistical Techniques in the

Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (2005 Dr Alex McConnachie, Dr Chris Weir, Robertson Centre for Biostatistics University of Glasgow)

• 7 domains– New crime domain added

• Public transport times included in access domain as sub-domain

• 37 indicators• Data (mostly) from 2004 and 2005• Published October 2006


SIMD 2009• Published on 29th October 2009• 7 domains

– Income– Employment– Health– Education– Access– Crime– Housing

• 38 indicators• Data (mostly) from 2007 and 2008


Employment Deprivation Domain

• Based on benefits data (2008)– Unemployment Claimant Count

• 12 month average– Incapacity Benefit recipients

• Working age– Severe Disablement Allowance

• Working age– Compulsory New Deal Participants

• No change to 2004 indicators for 2006 or 2009• Datazone SAPE

– Working age population


Income Deprivation Domain

• Not measuring income• Based on benefits data (2008 and 2007)

– Income support• adults and children

– Guarantee Pension Credit• adults

– Job Seekers Allowance• adults and children

• 2004 used WFTC and DTC data• 2009 – WTC and CTC (2006 data)• Datazone SAPE

– Total population


Housing Deprivation Domain• Census data

– No change since SIMD 2004– Persons in households which are

overcrowded– Persons in households without central heating

• Census populations– Total population

• No new indicators identified


Crime Domain• Relevant to Neighbourhood Deprivation• ‘SIMD crime’ not ‘Total Crime’

– Crimes of violence– Drug Offences– Domestic Housebreaking– Minor Assault– Vandalism

• Does not include crimes in/near police station• First included in 2006• Total populations – rate per 10,000• Move to financial year for SIMD 2009


Health Deprivation Domain• Indicators used:

– Standardised Mortality Ratio*– Hospital Episodes related to alcohol use*– Hospital Episodes related to drug use*– Comparative Illness Factor*– Emergency Admissions to Hospital*– Proportion of population being prescribed drugs for anxiety,

depression or psychosis– Proportion of live singleton births of low birth weight

• *Age – Sex Standardisation• Methodological changes since 2004

– Removal of Shrinkage• Minor changes for 2009• Normalised and combined using factor analysis


Education Deprivation Domain• Indicators

– School pupil absences– Pupil Performance on SQA at Stage 4– Working age people with no qualifications– 17-21 year olds enrolling into HE– People ages 16-18 not in full time education,

employment or training

• NEET indicator change for 2009• Populations relevant to indicator• Combined using factor analysis


Access to Services Domain (indicators)• Drive Times

– GP– Shopping facilities (Supermarket in 2004)– Petrol Station– Primary and Secondary Schools (Primary only in

2004)– Post Office

• Public Transport (Not included in SIMD 2004)– GP– Shopping Facilities– Post Office


• Population weighted based on COAs

• Factor analysis within sub-domains• Methodology and modelling changes• Change to sub-domain weights. (3/4:1/4 – 2/3:1/3)

Access to Services Domain (methodology)


Creating the index• Data zones ranked on 7 domains• Exponential Transformation• Combine to give index• Weights based on:

– Academic research– Data quality– Sensitivity analysis

• Use ranks for analysis


Domains and Weightings2004 2006 2009

Domains weight

% of overall weight Domains weight

% of overall weight weight

% of overall weight

Current Income 6 29 Current Income 12 28 12 28

Employment 6 29 Employment 12 28 12 28

Health 3 14 Health 6 14 6 14

Education, Skills and training 3 14

Education, Skills and training 6 14 6 14

Geographic Access and Telecommunications 2

10 Geographic Access:

4 9 4 9

~ Drive times 0.75 0.66

~ Public transport times

0.25 0.33

Housing 1 5 Housing 1 2 1 2

- - - Crime 2 5 2 5


Use of the index


Where to find things• SIMD publication, SIMD technical report, etc• SIMD website - publications, analysis, data,

interactive mapping: www.scotland.gov.uk/simd• Scottish Neighbourhood Statistics – wealth of

data zone level data and reporting tool: www.sns.gov.uk

• SNS user forum - SIMD presentations, geography look ups: www.scotland.gov.uk/topics/statistics/sns


Some ways to use the index• 15% most deprived datazones in Scotland, (or

10%, or 20%)• SIMD domains• SIMD within an area eg 10% most deprived data

zones in D&G• SIMD indicators• Relative vs Absolute change• Change over time.• Concentrations within an area (income and

employment domains)


Distribution of employment deprived* people

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Employment Domain Vigintile

% W

ork

ing

Ag

e P

op

ula

tio

n E

mp

loym

ent

Dep

rive

d

2004 2006 2009

Most Deprived Least Deprived

*Claiming Incapacity Benefit or Severe Disablement Allowance or on unemployment claimant count orNew Deal participants. Not ‘worklessness’ and not ‘unemployed’


Some ways to use the index• 15% most deprived datazones in Scotland, (or

10%, or 20%)• SIMD domains• SIMD within an area eg 10% most deprived data

zones in D&G• SIMD indicators• Relative vs Absolute change• Change over time.• Concentrations within an area (income and

employment domains)


An example forDumfries & Galloway


0.09 0.240.250.260.15

Box plots showing distribution of D&G datazones


Some things to consider

• Aims of analysis – the SIMD is A measure of deprivation

• Overall index vs domains vs indicators

• SIMD methodology

• Age / time period of data

• Population


Work in development


Current plans• Combining population data with SIMD• Guidance and examples of change over

time analysis at LA level• Relative vs Absolute change

• Analysis of change over time (Scotland)• National Performance Framework and

Local Outcome Indicators• More presentations and guidance• Annual updates to indicators and domains


SIMD and rural areas• Index identifies deprived datazones in both

urban and rural areas.• Identifies small area concentrations of multiple

deprivation.• The indicators which make up the SIMD are

chosen because they are measures of deprivation regardless of where a person lives.

• However deprivation more spatially dispersed in rural areas.

• Other factors, such as population decline, may also pose particular challenges for rural areas.


Rural indicators• SG looking into creating new ‘population’ domain

and combining it with existing income, employment and access domains

• Possible population indicators include:– Population density– Population change– Change in population aged 0-15– Change in population of pension age– Change in ratio of population aged 0-15 to working

age population– Change in ratio of population of pension age to

working age population


Population domain – INITIAL FINDINGS

• Initial investigations suggest that these indicators may not be sufficiently correlated with each other to allow creation of a population domain


INITIAL FINDINGS - Lack of correlation between indicators

Pop'n change v change in ratio of population aged 0-15 to working age population

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200

Pop'n change

chan

ge

in 0

-15:

wa

0-15 change v pension change

-50

0

50

100

150

200

-200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

0-15 change

Pen

sio

n c

han

ge

Population density v 0-15 change

-150-100-50

050

100150200250300

0 10000 20000 30000 40000

Density

0-1

5 c

han

ge

Change in ratio of children to working age population v change in ratio of pensioners to working age population

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30

change in 0-15:wa

ch

an

ge in

pen

s:w

a


Population domain – INITIAL FINDINGS

• Initial investigations suggest that these indicators may not be sufficiently correlated with each other to allow creation of a population domain

• Also shows that, in general, population decline not worse in more rural areas

• Likely that there are particular rural areas experiencing problems but that these problems are not necessarily an issue for all rural areas.

• Also possible that population decline in a rural area poses a more significant problem than a similar level of population decline in an urban area.


Population change by 8-fold Urban-Rural Classification

-6.0

-4.0

-2.0

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

Population Child (0-15) population Working age (16-59/64)population

Pension age (60/65+)population

Per

cen

tag

e ch

ang

e (2

005-

08)

Large Urban Areas Other Urban Areas Accessible Small Tow ns Remote Small Tow ns

Very Remote Small Tow ns Accessible Rural Remote Rural Very Remote Rural


ANY QUESTIONS?

Contacts:

Andrew White

Tel: 0131 244 7714

[email protected]

Matt PerkinsTel: 0131 244 [email protected]

Neighbourhood Statistics (SNS & SIMD)

Tel: 0131 244 0442

[email protected]

www.scotland.gov.uk/simd simd 2009 – technical aspects and use of the index matt perkins and...

Documents