1 / 12

Getting a better count – working with ONS for Census 2011

Getting a better count – working with ONS for Census 2011. Randal Smith Strategic Policy and Research. Census 2001 – national picture. 1.5m households missed 3.3m people missed Lowest return was 69%(?). Census 2001 - Hackney.

uriah-orr
Download Presentation

Getting a better count – working with ONS for Census 2011

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Getting a better count – working with ONS for Census 2011 Randal Smith Strategic Policy and Research

  2. Census 2001 – national picture • 1.5m households missed • 3.3m people missed • Lowest return was 69%(?)

  3. Census 2001 - Hackney • 1991 Census was taken in the midst of the poll tax, a lot of under-reporting • Hackney’s population was recorded as 163,000 • Census methodology includes making estimates of growth and rolling forward to next Census • 2001 Census found Hackney’s population to be 202,800 - or just 100 off the ONS estimate although the response rate was second lowest at 72% so considered “accurate”

  4. State of Population in Hackney • 2007 MYE show Hackney having a population of 209,700 • GLA PLP High is c.221,000 • Hackney commissioned study found a minimum confirmed population of 223,171 at 30 June 2007 • A difference of c.6.5% with ONS figures

  5. Impact: finance • Revenue Support Grant? • Undeterminable as this is a single pie and it may be the case that the undercount is even across the country (though doubtful) • Primary Care Trust • Funding mechanisms are too complicated to determine, eg each person over 65 attracts c£2500 funding while a 25 year old would only attract £250

  6. Impact: planning • Most marked where creating new catchment areas, eg Children’s centres • Why?

  7. Variation by Super Output Area

  8. Our approach with ONS • They believe their numbers are right • Provide them with local intelligence that they do not have access to • Continue to argue the need to use administrative data sets • Impress upon them the need to engage closely with us and not simply use local authorities as their comms team • Provide evidence of key areas for intervention

  9. Local intelligence • Case study 1: Charedi population • Orthodox Jewish community (8% of total population) • Completes forms above average • Identifies as white • Does not complete faith question (voluntary) • Growing at 8% per year = doubling every 9 years • Sub-group of white is invisible to ONS number crunchers

  10. Local intelligence • Case study 2: Turkish/Kurdish community • Completes forms no better than average • Identifies as white • Will answer faith question as Muslim • Natural growth rate is higher than national average for white population • Visible, but not entirely clear to ONS number crunchers

  11. What we are aiming to do • Identify poorly counted areas (variation map) and direct enumerators to those areas • Make use of electoral registration knowledge to target enumerators • Involve community organisations in enumeration • Inform ONS of local issues

  12. Questions • What do we consider a tolerable variation of the count/estimate within a borough? • How are you seeking to get the best count in 2011?

More Related