Buckinghamshire County Council Demographic and Deprivation Change in

Buckinghamshire County Council Demographic and Deprivation Change in Buckinghamshire Marcus Grupp Holly Pedrick Policy, Performance and Communications

Buckinghamshire County Council Purpose • To provide an update as to the changes underway in the Bucks population • To consider how the information can be used to shape services

Buckinghamshire County Council Drivers of population change: births • TFR Total Fertility Rate (TFR) • TFR increasing – 2. 1 children per woman (England similar) • Increases FR for all women key child bearing age (not under 20 s and 40+) • Rising births – 11% higher since 2001 (+600 yr)

Buckinghamshire County Council Drivers of population change: births - deaths • Births - constant TFR (2. 10) = 500 extra births annually • Deaths - constant 4 k per year • Natural increase in population due to more births than deaths Natural population change

Buckinghamshire County Council Drivers of population change: age structure of population 19, 838 more people (33%) More pensioner houses 4, 519 less people (-1%) Less families 8, 031 less Less young people young (-6%) people Modelled births (could be 5 k higher with 2. 1 TFR)

Buckinghamshire County Council Drivers of population change: housing • Household size = falling – 2. 47 people per house (2011) to 2. 32 (2026) – 2. 32 causes current population (510 k) to fall by 21 k (4%), but – 15 k new builds allocated creates a net rise 4 k people (514 k) by 2026 • Uncertainty in AVDC - 15 k homes to keep workforce constant (2006 -2031) – extra 4, 500 to 13, 500 homes not currently allocated (AVDC) • Number of houses affects net migration. . .

Buckinghamshire County Council Drivers of population change: migration • Lots movement in population (6% of Bucks population) – UK migration – 27 k move in / 26 k leave – Overseas migration – 3. 9 k move in / 3. 7 k leave Net Migration

Buckinghamshire County Council What does this mean for Bucks… • Small population increase - 1. 2% – aging population – ‘low’ number of new builds % change - 2011 to 2026 Clear aging population 100% • Uncertainty around CYP numbers – 9 k less 0 -15’s (1. 9 TFR) – No change 0 -15’s (2. 1 TFR) 80% 60% 40% • Housing – 15, 000 less working age – More allocations by AVDC? Uncertainty due to TFRs and houses builds 20% 0% -20% 0 -15 yrs * 16 -19 yrs 20 -64 yrs 65 -84 yrs 85+ yrs

Buckinghamshire County Council Locality differences Population Changes • • 2011 to 2026 -12% to -7% Get rid of decimals on legend 3% to 7% Increasing populations: – Urban – stable births and deaths – net in-migration increase – house builds 2. 5 x higher Decreasing populations: – rural – aging population, more deaths – falling births – Lowest rate of house builds

Buckinghamshire County Council Deprivation Issues and People at Risk • • 9% of children live in families in receipt of out of work benefits (9. 4 k) – More families experience income deprivation in areas classified as deprived by IMD 6% of children receive free school meals (4. 4 k) – Worse educational outcomes for these pupils Overall educational attainment is 65% – Most affluent ACORN groups 2. 5 x higher than least affluent groups Higher proportion of BME population in deprived areas – Worse education outcomes overall (Early years and KS 1, 2 and 4) and youth offending

Buckinghamshire County Council Deprivation Issues and People at Risk • • • 7. 4% of babies born were classed as low birth weight (national average 7. 6%) – Higher percentage of babies with low birth weight in IMD most deprived areas Increasing birth rate – Birth rate twice as high among the IMD most deprived areas than least deprived areas People who are affluent are less likely to become deprived – Current HP / MM areas previously classed as HP, MM, SS/PP, SF and UP 356 Looked After Children (LAC) in Bucks (2010) – LAC 2 x higher in IMD deprived LLSOA’s (0. 62% v’s 0. 31% of under 18 s) – 60% LAC from Moderate Means / Hard Pressed areas (4 x ave. MM, 7 x HP ) 45% of children have experienced bullying – Pupils from Hard Pressed and Urban Prosperity (town) areas are most affected 90 young women referred to ‘RU Safe’ (2009 -2010) – Higher risk of sexual exploitation for those who go missing frequently or live in care 11

Buckinghamshire County Council Index of Multiple Deprivation (2010) High Wycombe Seven IMD Domains 1. Income Deprivation 2. Employment Deprivation 3. Health Deprivation and Disability 4. Education, Skills and Training Deprivation 5. Barriers to Housing and Services 6. Crime 7. Living Environment Deprivation Aylesbury

Buckinghamshire County Council Number of people at risk • Multiple issues are experienced by those most in need • Large number people affected and getting worse - 4% population IMD No. of 30% most deprived areas (English scale) 5, 000 children aged 0 -15 14 18, 800 people 12 10 13, 100 people 8 6 4, 700 people 4 2 0 2004 2007 2010

Buckinghamshire County Council Hard Pressed and Moderate Means ACORN Variables • Age quartiles • Ethnicity • Type of employment • Level of qualifications • Socio economic classification • Commute method • Type of residential dwelling • Number of cars per household • Property owner or renter • Rooms and population per household

Buckinghamshire County Council Hard Pressed and Moderate Means • Only half of those affected are in Aylesbury & Wycombe Moderate Means and Hard Pressed Households Urban Market Town Rural Isolated Total Number of Households 20, 575 12, 634 2, 317 661 36, 187 Percentage of Households 57% 35% 6% 2% 100% Isolated not shown on map

Buckinghamshire County Council Hard Pressed and Moderate Means • Only half of those affected are in Aylesbury & Wycombe • Over 1/3 rd in Market Towns Moderate Means and Hard Pressed Households Urban Market Town Rural Isolated Total Number of Households 20, 575 12, 634 2, 317 661 36, 187 Percentage of Households 57% 35% 6% 2% 100% Isolated not shown on map

Buckinghamshire County Council Hard Pressed and Moderate Means • Only half of those affected are in Aylesbury & Wycombe • Over 1/3 rd in Market Towns • 1 in 10 in rural / isolated Moderate Means and Hard Pressed Households Urban Market Town Rural Isolated Total Number of Households 20, 575 12, 634 2, 317 661 36, 187 Percentage of Households 57% 35% 6% 2% 100% Isolated not shown on map

Buckinghamshire County Council Number of households at risk ACORN Moderate Means / Hard Pressed Households 36, 500 15. 7 k households are MM / HP families 34, 500 32, 500 Change (2008 -2011) • +29% Hard Pressed • -8% Moderate Means • + 12% Both groups 30, 500 2008 2009 2010 2011

Buckinghamshire County Council Key Issues • Recent unpredicted rise in TFR – more children • Falling household size – uncertainty of new house builds in AVDC • Reduction in population aged 0 – 15, but if new TFR remains constant then there will be no overall change • Children and families in areas at risk of deprivation are at a greater risk of experiencing certain issues e. g. LAC • Large number of children and families living in areas where people experience a range of deprivation issues • Around half of all areas at risk of deprivation are not in the urban areas in Bucks • How can this information be used to better shape services?