By Chris Reed, OPM researcher
In the wake of last week’s riots, there has been a desperate struggle to understand and explain them. This struggle has been all the more difficult where attempts at explanation have been interpreted as offering thinly-veiled excuses or justifications for the actions of rioters. Continue reading
Today marks the launch of a new study conducted by OPM for Inclusion London which reveals the profound barriers to equality experienced by Deaf and disabled people in London. The study, which consisted of a combination of a review of relevant literature and analysis of a selection of key British datasets, establishes a comprehensive evidence base for the social and economic characteristics of Deaf and disabled people in London and explores the impact of past and impending economic and social policies on this population.
The findings are startling, if not entirely surprising. Nearly 18% of London’s population is disabled, with some of London’s poorest minority ethnic communities most likely to be disabled. There is a marked difference in the level of poverty and barriers to employment experienced by disabled people in London compared with non-disabled people. London’s disabled people experience significant pay inequality: their average net weekly pay in London of £344.90 is almost £50 a week less than that of non-disabled people. Additionally, more than one in three households with disabled adults (35.5%) earn less than £300 a week which compares to only 19.8% of households with no disabled adults. While it is not surprising that disabled people are more likely to be claiming multiple benefits, and have been doing so for a longer period of time, our analysis of disability benefit receipt shows that disabled people are significantly under claiming the benefits to which they are entitled.
Households with disabled people face multiple challenges in making ends meet. For example, households with disabled adults are also more likely to have disabled children living in them compared with households with no disabled adults: 18.5% of households with disabled adults have one disabled child living in the same household compared with only 10% of households with no disabled adults. Additionally, households with disabled children are also more likely to have other dependent children living in them, compared with households with no disabled children. These characteristics create multiple compounding barriers and are reflected in the high levels of poverty and unmet need in disabled peoples’ households.
Disabled people in London are less likely to hold degree level qualifications compared with non-disabled people as a result of barriers: roughly one third of disabled people (34%) in London hold degree level qualifications compared with almost half (46.6%) of non-disabled people. Furthermore, not only are disabled people more likely to be unemployed than non-disabled people, they are also much more likely to stay unemployed for a longer period of time. They are also likely to find it difficult to get permanent or full-time jobs compared to non-disabled people thus rendering their employment patterns more erratic.
The overwhelming message that emerges from our analysis and review of evidence is that disabled people in London are likely to be amongst those that suffer the most from the tax, benefit and spending measures announced last year. In fact considered together, all fiscal consolidation measures announced to date are likely to result in a 20-35% loss in net income per year for a significant proportion of disabled people in London.
More specifically, they are likely to be disproportionately affected by public sector job cuts because they are more likely than non-disabled people to work in the public sector: there are approximately 114,000 disabled people working in the public sector in London who face the risk of losing their jobs.
Disabled Londoners are also likely to be disproportionately affected by the planned changes to social housing and housing benefit. This is because they are more likely than non-disabled Londoners to live in accommodation rented from the local authority and are four times more likely than non-disabled people to be receiving housing benefit.
Finally, it is important to note that although our report only discusses the financial impact of fiscal consolidation measures there is a wealth of evidence indicating that financial or economic exclusion is correlated with many other forms of exclusion and disadvantage. This means that the impacts discussed are only a starting point for understanding how spending cuts and policy changes are going to impact on disabled people in London.
To download and read the report click here.
To find out more about OPM’s work on disability click here.
By Sanah Sheikh, OPM associate fellow
How can local agencies work together to reduce health inequalities within the current economic climate? How can local agencies focus on the ‘causes of the causes’ and really get to grips with the gap in health outcomes across local communities? And what are the conditions needed to successfully focus on the wider social determinants of health?
These were just some of the questions explored by OPM during the Delivering Reductions in Health Inequalities national conference held on 25 March, hosted by the NHS Institute for Improvement and Innovation. The event was attended by over 120 Directors of Public Health, local authority managers, healthcare professionals and charity leaders.
The event marked the end of the Healthy Places Healthy Lives programme, a twelve-month Department of Health funded initiative, hosted and managed by the NHS Institute, aimed at developing innovative ways of reducing health inequalities in local communities. The programme ran in 25 local areas, with local authorities and primary care trusts working with other local partners to design and deliver new approaches to tacking a ‘wicked problem’ affecting their local area.
Healthy Places, Healthy Lives builds on the Marmot Review findings, and aimed to focus on the causes of locally identified ‘wicked problems’, such as teenage pregnancy or childhood obesity, to tackle health inequalities.
OPM has been evaluating the Healthy Places Healthy Lives programme, and at the conference we shared some of our findings with the audience.
The headline findings from the evaluation are that there are certain key factors which help to ensure success in getting to the root cause of health inequalities. These factors are:
• Leadership: strong, consistent leadership by a senior champion is vital, and helps to ensure other partners to engage in the agenda.
• Alignment with broader programmes of work: linking innovative programmes with wider health improvement activity can help to secure access to funding and promote sustainability of the work.
• Understanding the ‘wicked problem: defining the area of focus according to a ‘causes of the causes’ health inequality approach to encompass and address the wider social determinants of health inequalities.
• Stakeholders, partnerships and governance: using existing partnership structures can help to save time at the start of the project, and early work to clarify governance can pay dividends in the end!
• Programme clarity and transparency: a top-led, bottom-fed approach works well, with top down guidance and bottom up identification and ownership of a local challenge. Clarity regarding expectations and support arrangements is vital from the outset.
• Support arrangements: it’s important to share learning across different areas, both about what works and what doesn’t. The NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement and the Fellows and Consultants working on the programme have shared learning as the project has progressed, and will continue to do so outside of the programme.
• Sustainability: Potential learning from the programme will emerge over several years and steps should be taken to ensure this is captured for both local and national audiences. Local partnerships have been able to put plans in place to sustain the work once the programme finishes, by involving commissioners and strategic planners.
We know that different approaches are needed to really make a difference, with a shift in mindset from tackling the symptoms to fully understanding what lies behind inequalities in health outcomes. The Healthy Places, Healthy Lives programme acted as a catalyst, sharpening partners’ focus on the ‘wicked problem’ and providing momentum.
By Lauren Roberts, OPM associate fellow
A very happy new year to all of the readers of our blog, from everyone at OPM. As a palliative to the slightly grim reality of the first week back at work, we’re delighted to be able to post videos of the speakers at the seminar we held before the break.
Each gave a different, sometimes provocative, but always stimulating, perspective on the pressing question of what the Big Society agenda will mean for inequality.
As well as Gill Bull, executive head of policy at the London Borough of Sutton, a council in the vanguard of the reforms, whose contribution you can watch below, these links will take you to the videos for:
By Satdeep Grewal, OPM researcher
On 30 November 2010 OPM held a public interest seminar at which panellists and participants explored the impact that the Coalition’s Big Society reforms are likely to have on inequality.
The discussion covered everything from community organisers and coproduction to behaviour change and the role of voluntary sector organisations.
Below is a note of the key points made and issues covered at the seminar itself, which you can also download as a PDF. If you’d like to be added to our mailing list and be amongst the first to hear about future seminars please email seminars@opm.co.uk.
If you’re interested in the background to this pressing issue you can read a briefing paper outlining the key issues and policy context.
Inequality and the Big Society – Seminar Report 30 Nov
On Tuesday 30th November OPM will be hosting a seminar to explore the vitally important issue of whether the Government’s Big Society agenda stands to damage – or even potentially improve – equality. Speakers include Anna Coote from the New Economics Foundation and Gill Bull, director of policy at one of the Government’s ‘vanguard’ councils, Sutton.
At the time of writing there were still a few places remaining, and you can find out more details by clicking here. In order to get the debate started, we’ve pulled together the short briefing paper below, which highlights some of the policy background and a few of the key questions we’ll be looking to cover.
A Bigger and More Equal Society – Briefing Paper
We’re really excited to be able to announce not one but two public interest seminars this November.
On Tuesday 30 November OPM will host an evening of discussion and debate in response to pressing concerns about the potential impact of the Big Society agenda on social inequality.
While there is much positivity about what the Big Society agenda could achieve to empower communities to better serve their own needs, there is also understandable concern about the potential impact on more disadvantaged communities who do not currently have the necessary resources (e.g. time and social capital) to take advantage of these opportunities. As well as exploring the risk that the Big Society agenda may increase inequality, the seminar will also explore some practical suggestions for mitigating this risk, and ask whether there is an opportunity to use the Big Society as a vehicle to reduce social inequality.
Confirmed speakers include Anna Coote, head of social policy at the New Economics Foundation and author of Ten big questions about the Big Society and ten ways to make the best of it; Gill Bull, executive head of policy at one of the CLG Big Society ‘vanguard’ authorities, Sutton; Belinda Pratten from the National Council for Voluntary Organisations; and Toby Blume from Urban Forum.
On Monday 22 November we’ll be turning our attention to the role of local government in this new and challenging landscape. The number and speed of proposed changes to the sector has prompted many local authorities to think radically and ask: what is local government for? If councils have to do less, what things do they have to do and what sorts of organisations do they need to be to maintain those crucial functions?
Giving their views on this crucial debate will be the chief executives of two of the most advanced and innovative authorities in England: Gavin Jones from Swindon Borough Council, and Chris Bull, joint chief executive of Herefordshire County Council and NHS Herefordshire. You can hear about some of the radical changes made in both these places in a video posted on this blog.
Both seminars will be held in the evening (6 pm for a 6:15 pm start, finished by 7.45 pm), at our offices at 252B Gray’s Inn Road, WC1X 8XG, a ten minute walk from King’s Cross. The seminars are free, but places are strictly limited so please do let us know as soon as possible if you would like to attend, by emailing Kimberley Green on kgreen@opm.co.uk.
