Wiswell and Pendleton Ward Profile - Ribble Valley Borough ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Wiswell and Pendleton Ward Profile
CONTENTS
1 POPULATION, AGE AND ETHNICITY
2 DEPRIVATION
3 MOSAIC DATA
4 EDUCATION
5 EMPLOYMENT/UNEMPLOYMENT
6 HEALTH
7 HOUSING AND TENURE
8 CRIME
9 AREA MAP
10 KEY RESOURCES FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION
Wiswell and Pendleton
Population: 1,316
Households: 572
LSOA’s: E01025354
1
Ward Profile – Wiswell and Pendleton
BACKGROUND
This ward profile is part of series providing key statistical data for each of the 24 wards which make up the district of Ribble Valley. The aim of this profile is to
describe the key characteristics of each ward – demography, housing and employment in the context of the rest of Ribble Valley, regionally and nationally.
This ward profile supplements the larger Ribble Valley profile, which provides a more comprehensive picture of the district.
The ward includes the following villages and hamlets: Worston, Mearley, Pendleton, Barrow and Wiswell. The following villages neighbour the ward:
Chatburn, Downham, Sabden, Whalley, Great Mitton and the town of Clitheroe.
Places of Interest
Today the village of Wiswell only boasts a pub/restaurant (Freemasons Arms). However, there used to be a small corner shop, school and church; the names
of each still stand on the original buildings but they are now prominent houses in the village.
The property in which the current pub operates was not originally designed as a public house. It was formerly three small cottages one of which was a
freemasons’ lodge, which is how it acquired its name. The original village pub, the Lamb Inn, was located adjacent to the public phone box, but no longer
exists and is now known as Clegg House, a residence on the corner of Coronation Gardens. The Lamb Inn closed over 150 years ago and Wiswell was
without a pub for some time as the Freemasons did not open until considerably later on.
The ward has one borough Conservative councillors - Cllr Robert James Thompson.
Cllr Robert Thompson
01254 822794
cllr.thompson@ribblevalley.gov.uk
2
OVERVIEW
•Wiswell and Pendleton's ward population in •Wiswell and Pendleton has the Barriers to •The ward is mainly a mix of the following main •There are no schools within the ward.
2011 stood at 1,316. Housing and Services domain in the bottom socio-economic groups: •Just over 12% of residents have no
•The ward is more sparsely populated than the 20% and the Living Environment domain in the •Residents of isolated rural communities qualifications; this is lower than the Ribble
average for the borough. bottom 40%. •Residents of small and mid-sized towns with Valley figure of 18.3% and much lower than
•Wiswell and Pendleton has a higher strong local roots the national figure of 27%.
percentage of residents aged 65+ in •Wealthy people living in the most sought- •43% of the residents of the ward have a level 4
comparison to the national, Lancashire and after neighbourhoods educational qualification compared to nearly
Ribble Valley average and a lower percentage •Successful professionals living in suburban or 34% in Ribble Valley and only 25% in
of residents aged under 15 compared to the semi-rural homes Lancashire
national average.
•98.56% of residents in Wiswell and Pendleton
are White.
Population Deprivation Mosaic Education
•72.59% of working age people (16-74) in •85.49% of respondents in the ward indicated •Recorded crime in Wiswell and Pendleton is •The ward consists of 572 households, an
Wiswell and Pendleton are classed as their day to day activities are not limited due 37.2 per 1,000 population compared to 31.8 increase of 14 between the 2001 and 2011
economically active. to health or disability, this is a slightly higher as the Ribble Valley district average and 63.9 Census.
rate than the average for the borough with as the Lancashire County average (January •78.5% of households are owner occupiers.
83.29%. 5.55% indicated they were limited a 2014 – December 2014) The rented sector consists of 20.3% of
lot. •There were 266.7 calls to the Police, 84.3 calls households, with the majority being private
•A high percentage of respondents (86.63%) in to Ambulance services and 6.1 calls to Fire and rented stock.
Wiswell and Pendleton rate their health as Rescue services per 1,000 population in •Wiswell and Pendleton has a high percentage
good or very good. Wiswell and Pendleton. (47.55%) of detached properties.
•In the same period there were 37.2 calls per
1,000 population made to the Police regarding
anti-social behaviour.
Employment Health Crime Housing
3
1 POPULATION, AGE AND ETHNICITY
POPULATION
The population of Wiswell and Pendleton according to the 2011 Census is 1,316 (made up of Ribble Valley Population by Ward
637 males and 679 females). Wiswell and Pendleton is a smaller than average sized ward
(the equal smallest ward in Ribble Valley) in terms of population. Whalley 3895
Wiswell and Pendleton 1316
When looking at density of population (number of persons per hectare) the ward is more
Wilpshire 2582
sparsely populated (0.5 people per hectare) than the average for the borough (1 person per
Waddington and West Bradford 2933
hectare). The England average is 4.1 people per hectare.
St Mary's 2846
Salthill 3135
Sabden 1422
Ribchester 1598
Read and Simonstone 2573
Primrose 3075
Mellor 2672
Littlemoor 2936
Langho 2261
Gisburn, Rimington 1405
Edisford and Low Moor 2773
Dilworth 2551
Derby and Thornley 2995
Clayton-le-Dale with Ramsgreave 2633
Chipping 1356
Chatburn 1316
Bowland, Newton and Slaidburn 1325
Billington and Old Langho 3154
Alston and Hothersall 2643
Aighton, Bailey and Chaigley 1737
0 2000 4000 6000
Source: ONS, Census 2011
Source: ONS, Census 2011
4AGE STRUCTURE
The ward has a higher percentage of residents aged 65+ in comparison to the national,
Lancashire and Ribble Valley average and a lower percentage of residents aged under 15
compared to the national average.
A high percentage of Wiswell and Pendleton residents are aged 45 to 59.
All Ages 0-9 10-19 20-44 45-64 65+
Wiswell and 1,316 148 132 337 419 280
Pendleton
11.25% 10.03% 25.61% 31.84% 21.28%
Source: ONS, Census 2011
Source: ONS, Census 2011
Projected growth in Ribble Valley population by age
ONS projected population growth for the borough is 64,800 by
2035.
Source: ONS, 2010 – based Sub-National Population Projections (2012)
5Ethnicity Profile
98.56% of residents in Wiswell and Pendleton are White. This is slightly higher than
the Ribble Valley average and considerably higher than the England average.
% Wiswell Ribble Valley England
and
Pendleton
White 98.56 97.8 85.5
Mixed 0.38 0.7 2.2
Asian or Asian British 0.15 1.4 7.7
Black or Black British 0.15 0.1 3.4
Other Ethnic Group 0.76 0.1 1
Source: ONS, 2011 Census
S
Source: ONS, 2011 Census
62 DEPRIVATION
The Index of Multiple Deprivation 2015 (IMD) measures deprivation down to Lower Super Output Area (LSOA) level – areas containing around 1,500 people.
32,482 LSOAs (nationally) make up the IMD with each area being scored across 8 domains (see below) then ranked from most to least deprived, with the 326
English districts also being ranked. Ribble Valley is made up of 40 LSOAs.
Index of Education, Barriers to
Health Living
Multiple Income Employment Crime Skills and Housing and
Deprivation and Environment
Deprivation Decile Decile Decile Training Services
Disability Decile Decile
LSOA Ward Decile (IMD) Decile Decile
E01025354 Wiswell and Pendleton 8 10 8 9 8 10 2 4
(where 1st decile is most deprived, 10th decile is least deprived)
The table above shows the eight IMD domains split by LSOA and ranks all LSOAs nation-wide. Those areas most deprived are ranked in the top 10% - the 1st
decile (red) and the least deprived are the higher numbers (green).
As can be seen Wiswell and Pendleton has the Barriers to Housing and Services domain in the bottom 20% and the Living Environment domain in the bottom
40%.
What do the Ranks mean?
Education Skills and Training - measures the extent of deprivation in terms of education, skills and training in an area. The indicators are structured into two sub-domains: one relating to
children and young people and one relating to adult skills.
Crime - measures the rate of recorded crime in an area for four major crime types representing the risk of personal and material victimisation at a small area level.
Employment - measures employment deprivation in an area conceptualised as involuntary exclusion of the working age population from the labour market.
Barriers to Housing and Other Services - measures the physical and financial accessibility of housing and key local services. The indicators fall into two sub-domains: ‘geographical barriers’,
which relate to the physical proximity of local services, and ‘wider barriers’ which includes issues relating to access to housing such as affordability.
Health and Disability - measures premature death and the impairment of quality of life by poor health. It considers both physical and mental health. The domain measures morbidity, disability
and premature mortality but not aspects of behaviour or environment that may be predictive of future health deprivation.
Income - measures the proportion of the population in an area experiencing deprivation related to low income.
Living Environment - measures the quality of individuals’ immediate surroundings both within and outside the home. The indicators fall into two sub-domains: the ‘indoors’ living environment,
which measures the quality of housing, and the ‘outdoors’ living environment which contains two measures relating to air quality and road traffic accidents.
73 MOSAIC DATA
Mosaic UK is Experian’s system for classification of UK households. It is one of a number of commercially available geodemographic segmentation systems,
applying the principles of geodemography to consumer household and individual data collated from a number of governmental and commercial sources. The
current version, Mosaic UK 2009, classifies the UK population into 15 main socio-economic groups and, within this, 67 different types.
Mosaic has found application outside their original purpose of direct marketing, including governmental estimates and forecasts, and it is also used extensively
in understanding local service users. Mosaic also introduced Mosaic Public Sector with more politically correct segment names.
Mosaic 2010 Classifications
Group Distinct Types
A02 - Retirees A03 - Remote
A01 - Rural A04 - Villagers
electing to settle communities
Residents of families with with few well
in with poor
A isolated rural high incomes paid alternatives
environmentally access to public
communities” - often from to agricultural
attractive and commercial
city jobs employment
localities services
B05 - Better B07 - Empty B08 - Mixed
B06 – Self-
Residents of small off empty nester owner communities with
employed trades
and mid-sized nesters in low occupiers many single
B people living in
towns with strong density making little use people in the
smaller
local roots” estates on of public centres of small
communities
town fringes services towns
C09 -
C10 - Wealthy C11 - Creative
Successful C12 - Residents
Wealthy people families in professionals
older in smart city
living in the most substantial seeking
C business centre flats who
sought-after houses with little involvement in
leaders living make little use of
neighbourhoods” community local
in sought-after public services
involvement communities
suburbs
D15 - Well off
Successful D13 - Higher D16 - Higher
D14 - Older commuters
professionals income older income families
people living in living in
D living in suburban champions of concerned with
large houses in spacious
or semi-rural village education and
mature suburbs houses in semi-
homes communities careers
rural settings
E17 - E21 - Middle
E19 – Self-
Comfortably E18 - Industrial E20 - Upwardly aged families
Middle income reliant older
off suburban workers living mobile South living in less
families living in families in
E families comfortably in Asian families fashionable
moderate suburban semis
weakly tied to owner occupied living in inter war inter war
suburban semis in industrial
their local semis suburbs suburban
towns
community semis
8Group Distinct Types
Residents K49 - Low
F23 - Early F24 - Young K50 - Older
F22 - Busy F25 - Personnel with K48 - Middle income older
Couples with middle aged parents new to families in low K51 - Often
executives in reliant on the sufficient aged couples couples long
young children in parents likely to their value housing indebted families
F town houses Ministry of K incomes in and families in established in
comfortable be involved in neighbourhood - in traditional living in low rise
in dormitory Defence for right-to-buy right-to-buy former
modern housing their children's keen to put industrial estates
settlements public services social homes council
education down roots areas
housing estates
L54 - Retired
G30 - Diverse L52 -
G28 - Singles Active L53 - people of
G26 - Well G29 - Young communities Communities L55 - Capable
G27 - City and sharers elderly Residents in modest
educated professional of well- of wealthy older people
dwellers owning occupying people living retirement - means
singles living families settling educated L older people leasing / owning L
houses in older converted in pleasant second home commonly
in purpose in better quality singles living living in large flats in purpose
neighbourhoods Victorian retirement and tourist living in
built flats older terraces in smart - seaside built blocks
houses locations communities seaside
Young, well- small flats houses
bungalows
G educated city
G31 - Owners
dwellers M56 - Older
in smart
G32 - Students G33 - Transient G34 - Students people living M57 - Old M58 - Less M59 - People
purpose built Elderly
and other singles - poorly involved in on social people in flats mobile older living in social
flats in people
transient singles supported by college and M housing subsisting on people accommodation
prestige reliant on
in multi-let family and university estates with welfare requiring a designed for
locations - state support
houses neighbours communities limited payments degree of care older people
many newly
budgets
built
N60 - Tenants N61 - N64 - Diverse
H35 -
H36 - Young H37 - Young in social Childless N62 - Young N63 - homesharers
Couples and Childless new H38 - People
singles and owners and housing flats tenants in renters in flats Multicultural renting small
young singles in owner living in brand
H sharers renting rented Young on estates at social with a tenants renting flats in
small modern occupiers in new residential
small purpose developments of people risk of serious housing flats cosmopolitan flats in areas of densely
starter homes cramped new developments
built flats mixed tenure renting flats social with modest mix social housing populated
homes
N in high problems social needs areas
I43 - Older density N65 - Young
I39 - Young I40 - Multi-ethnic I41 - Renters of
I42 - South Asian town centres social singles in
owners and communities in older terraces in
communities terraces with housing multi-ethnic
private renters newer suburbs ethnically
experiencing transient - communities -
in inner city away from the diverse
social deprivation single many in high
terraces inner city communities
Lower income populations rise flats
workers in urban O68 -
I O67 - Older
terraces in often I44 - Low Families in Families with O69 -
tenants on Families in
diverse areas income low-rise varied Vulnerable
low rise social low-rise social
families social structures young parents
O housing O housing with
occupying housing with living on low needing
estates where high levels of
poor quality high levels of rise social substantial
jobs are benefit need
older terraces benefit need housing state support
scarce
estates
J45 - Low
Owner occupiers J46 - Residents J47 -
income
in older-style in blue collar Comfortably off
communities
J housing, typically communities industrial Unclassified
reliant on low
in ex-industrial revitalised by workers owning
skill industrial
areas commuters their own homes
jobs
94 EDUCATION
There are no schools within the ward.
Just over 12% of residents have no qualifications; this is lower than the
Ribble Valley figure of 18.3% and much lower than the Lancashire figure of
nearly 24%, the North West level of 24% and the national figure of 27%.
Level 4 and above qualifications cover: Degree (BA, BSc), Higher Degree
(MA, PhD), NVQ Level 4-5, HNC, HND, RSA Higher Diploma, BTEC Higher
level, Professional Qualifications (Teaching, Nursing and Accountancy).
43% of the residents of the ward have achieved this level of education
compared to nearly 34% in Ribble Valley and only 25% in Lancashire.
Source: ONS, 2011 Census
105 EMPLOYMENT/UNEMPLOYMENT
According to the findings from the 2011 Census 72.59% of working age
people (16-74) in Wiswell and Pendleton are classed as economically
active, slightly higher than the Lancashire figure of 68.11%, and the
England figure of 69.91% and Ribble Valley figure of 71.87%.
Unemployment is low in the ward at 1.87% in comparison to the
England figure of 4.38%, the Ribble Valley figure of 2.06% and the
Lancashire figure of 3.76%.
Economic inactivity in the ward can mostly be apportioned to being
‘retired’.
Data for the % of working age population receiving key out-of-work
benefits (which includes the groups: job seekers, ESA and incapacity
benefits, lone parents and others on income related benefits) is too
small to be analysed.
Job Seekers Allowance (JSA)
The Jobseeker's Allowance (JSA) is payable to people under
pensionable age who are available for, and actively seeking, work.
Total JSA claimants (October 2015)
Wiswell and Pendleton
Ribble Valley (%) Great Britain (%)
(%)
All people # 0.5 1.6
Males # 0.6 2.0
Females # 0.3 1.2
Source: claimant count with rates and proportions
Note: The percentage figures show the number of JSA claimants as a proportion of resident
population aged 16-64.
Information from the DWP regarding benefit payments is currently
unavailable for Wiswell and Pendleton.
Source: ONS, 2011 Census
116 HEALTH
In the 2011 Census 85.49% of respondents in the ward indicated that their day to day activities are
not limited due to health or disability, this is a slightly higher rate than the average for the borough
with 83.29%. 5.55% indicated they were limited a lot (Ribble Valley 7.13%), which is lower than the
Lancashire figure of 9.85%.
A high percentage of respondents (86.63%) in Wiswell and Pendleton rate their health as good or
very good.
The health of people in Ribble Valley is generally better than the England average. Deprivation is
lower than average, however about 6.6% (600) children live in poverty. Life expectancy for both
men and women is higher than the England average. Life expectancy is not significantly different
for people in the most deprived areas of Ribble Valley than in the least deprived areas.
Child health - In Year 6, 11.4% (67) of children are classified as obese, better than the average for
England. The rate of alcohol specific hospital stays among those under 18 was 57.9*. 1 This
represents 7 stays per year. Levels of breastfeeding and smoking at time of delivery are worse
than the England average. Levels of GCSE attainment are better than the England average.
Adult health - In 2012, 18.6% of adults were
classified as obese, better than the average for
England. The rate of alcohol related harm hospital
stays was 522*, better than the average for
England. This represents 300 stays per year. The
rate of self-harm hospital stays was 154.5*. This
represents 81 stays per year. The rate of smoking
related deaths was 309*. This represents 111
deaths per year. The rate of people killed and
seriously injured on roads is worse than average.
Rates of sexually transmitted infections and TB
are better than average. Rates of statutory
homelessness, violent crime, long term unemployment and drug misuse are better than average.
Local priorities - priorities in Ribble Valley include alcohol harm reduction, long term conditions
including dementia and access from rural settings.
Source: ONS, 2011 Census
1
* rate per 100,000 population
127 HOUSING AND TENURE
Wiswell and Pendleton consists of 572 households. The number of households in the ward
has increased by 14 between the 2001 and 2011 Census.
78.5% of households are owner occupiers. The rented sector consists of 20.3% of
households, with the majority being private rented stock.
2.4% of households do not have central heating. 2.3 is the average household size. The
average number of rooms per household is 6.5. The average number of bedrooms per
household is 3.
Wiswell and Pendleton has a high percentage (47.55%) of detached properties.
The largest household type in the ward is ‘Married or same sex civil partnership with
dependent children,’ this accounts for 18.7% of all households, followed by ‘Married or same
sex civil partnership with no dependent children’ accounting for 18%.
1.7% of the residential
population have a second address
outside the UK and 3.19% have a
second address within the UK.
Source: ONS, 2011 Census
138 CRIME
Recorded crime in Wiswell and Pendleton is 37.2 per 1,000 population compared to 31.8 as the Ribble Valley district average and 63.9 as the
Lancashire County average (January 2014 – December 2014)
Calls to emergency services (January 2014 – December 2014) there were 266.7 calls to the Police, 84.3 calls to Ambulance services and 6.1 calls to
Fire and Rescue services per 1,000 population in Wiswell and Pendleton.
In the same period there were 37.2 calls per 1,000 population made to the Police regarding anti-social behaviour.
Source: http://www.saferlancashire.co.uk/2011/statistics/index.asp
14Actual Crimes/Incidents Rate per 1,000 population, except for Dom. Burglary which is rate per 1,0000 households
Jan 2013 to Jan 2014 to Year on Year Percentage Jan 2013 to Jan 2014 to RV District Average Lancs County Average
Dec 2013 Dec 2014 Difference Change Dec 2013 Dec 2014 (Jan 2014 to Dec 2014) (Jan 2014 to Dec 2014)
Calls to the Police 368 351 -17 -4.6% 279.6 266.7 204.9 357.6
Calls to the Ambulance Services 111 111 0 0% 84.3 84.3 104 147.9
Calls to the Fire & Rescue Services 22 8 -14 -63.6% 16.7 6.1 6.1 10.3
Total Recorded Crime 30 49 19 63.3% 22.8 37.2 31.8 63.9
Violence Against The Person 1 6 5 500% 0.8 4.6 6.8 15.6
Calls to the Police about Domestic 7 4 -3 -42.9% 5.3 3 5.5 16
Violence
Calls to the Ambulance Service 0 1 1 n/c 0 0.8 0.3 0.9
where violence involved
All Drug Offences 2 2 0 0% 1.5 1.5 0.9 2.2
Numbers Killed or Serious Injured 2 0 -2 n/c 1.5 0 0.4 0.3
on the Roads
Serious Acquisitive Crime 5 8 3 60% 3.8 6.1 5.8 8.9
Robbery 0 0 0 0% 0 0 0.1 0.4
All Burglary 3 12 9 300% 5.2 21 12.6 20.4
Domestic Burglaries 2 2 0 0% 3.5 3.5 4.4 8.1
All Vehicle Crime 4 8 4 100% 3 6.1 4.5 5.9
Theft of a Vehicle 1 0 -1 n/c 0.8 0 0.7 1.2
Theft from a Vehicle 2 6 4 200% 1.5 4.6 3.2 3.9
All Criminal Damage (including 1 6 5 500% 0.8 4.6 4.7 10.9
Arson)
Deliberate Fires 0 1 1 n/c 0 0.8 0.2 1.7
Deliberate Vehicle Fires 0 0 0 0% 0 0 0 0
Calls to the Police about Anti-Social 48 49 1 2.1% 36.5 37.2 27.7 53.7
Behaviour
n/a = Not Available, n/c = Not Calculated
Source: http://www.saferlancashire.co.uk/2011/statistics/statistics.asp
159 Area Map
10 Key resources for further information
statistics.gov.uk – The Office for National Statistics’ main website
(ONS)
neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk – A subset of the ONS website
which collates and presents socio-demographic data available at different
geographical levels
nomisweb.co.uk – A subset of the ONS website which collates and
presents labour market statistics
data.gov.uk – Single, searchable website of all public data collated
and used by public agencies
saferlancashire.co.uk – A searchable website of crime statistics for
Lancashire and used by public agencies
Education.gov.uk – A searchable website for the performance of all
schools in England and Wales
http://www.saferlancashire.co.uk/2011/statistics/index.asp - Safer
Lancashire Crime Statistics
16You can also read
