Ipsos MORI Local Chief Executive, Ipsos MORI Ben Page Its making - - PDF document

Ben Page

Chief Executive, Ipsos MORI

Ipsos MORI Local

PEOPLE, PERCEPTIONS AND PLACE

It’s making the new s…

And w e are of course, all Localists now ….

Who said this?

“[We propose]… giving local communities the power to drive real improvements in everything from the way their neighbourhoods are policed to the way that community assets are used. I believe it will help to build the vibrant local democracies

• n which our society and our public services

depend.…” “Newly empowered councils... through a new 'general power of competence' will be able to do literally whatever they like as long as it's legal - creating solutions to local problems without getting permission from the centre.” “We need to take control away from central government, where bureaucrats and ministers are in charge, and give it to local government, people and communities”.

The Place Survey show s some real success in local areas

80% 75% 77% 82% 77% 70% 75% 69% 80% 71% 66% 73%

65% 70% 75% 80% 85%

2006 2008

Year surveyed Satisfaction

Average District Mets & Unitaries LB Inner London Outer London

Q Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your local area as a place to live?

We’re happier w ith w here w e live

Base: Place Survey 2008/09 (352 local authorities), BVPI 2006 and 2003 (387 local authorities) Source: Ipsos MORI

Q Thinking about this local area, how much of a problem do you think each of the following are… 7 strand ASB index

…ASB is still going dow n

Base: Place Survey 2008/09 (352 local authorities), BVPI 2006 and 2003 (387 local authorities) Source: Ipsos MORI

20% 38% 23% 36% 21% 19% 42% 23% 27% 43% 27% 29% 41% 26% 28% 45% 30% 26%

15% 25% 35% 45%

2003 2008

Year surveyed Problem

Average District Mets & Unitaries LB Inner London Outer London

2006

Q Thinking about this local area, how much of a problem do you think each of the following are… People using or dealing drugs?

Particularly drugs…

Source: Ipsos MORI

31% 60% 43% 60% 42% 29% 63% 33% 46% 61% 36% 45% 60% 38% 50% 61% 44% 35%

25% 35% 45% 55% 65%

2003 2008

Year surveyed Problem

Average District Mets & Unitaries LB Inner London Outer London

2006

Base: Place Survey 2008/09 (352 local authorities), BVPI 2006 and 2003 (387 local authorities)

Q Thinking about this local area, how much of a problem do you think each of the following are… Teenagers hanging around the streets?

…and the terror of teenagers declining

Base: Place Survey 2008/09 (352 local authorities), BVPI 2006 and 2003 (387 local authorities) Source: Ipsos MORI

45% 57% 57% 56% 55% 40% 60% 50% 61% 59% 48% 60% 56% 48% 56% 61% 63% 49%

35% 45% 55% 65%

2003 2008

Year surveyed Problem

Average District Mets & Unitaries LB Inner London Outer London

2006

BUT local authorities getting none of the credit…

45% 55% 53% 56% 55% 46% 52% 42% 50% 52% 49% 54% 55% 56% 57% 51% 51% 46%

35% 40% 45% 50% 55% 60%

2003 2008

Year surveyed Satisfaction

Average District Mets & Unitaries LB Inner London Outer London

Q How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the way your local council runs things?

Satisfaction w ith Council is dow n

Base: Place Survey 2008/09 (352 local authorities), BVPI 2006 and 2003 (387 local authorities) BVPI 2003 Inner London mean excludes Islington, Newham and Tower Hamlets, BVPI 2003 Outer London mean excludes Croydon Source: Ipsos MORI

2006

38% 41% 37% 37% 40% 36%

All council average Districts Mets & Unitaries London boroughs Inner London Outer London

…because people don’t know w hat’s happening?

% Informed Q Overall, how well informed do you feel you are kept about local public services?

Base: Place Survey 2008/09 (131 local authorities: 59 district councils, 33 London boroughs, 25 Metropolitan districts and 14 unitary authorities) Source: Ipsos MORI

Q Thinking about this local area, how much of a problem do you think each of the following are… rubbish or litter lying around?

For example, rubbish or litter lying around is less of a problem…

Base: Place Survey 2008/09 (131 local authorities), BVPI 2006 and 2003 (387 local authorities) Source: Ipsos MORI

39% 45% 42% 41% 39% 32% 50% 44% 48% 59% 45% 53% 56% 44% 52% 61% 54% 47%

30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 55% 60% 65%

2003 2008

Year surveyed Problem

Average District Mets & Unitaries LB Inner London Outer London

2006

Q How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with each of the following services provided or supported by your local authority?… keeping public land clear of litter and refuse

…BUT satisfaction w ith the council on this has fallen

*2006 question wording: How satisfied or dissatisfied are you that the local authority has kept this land clear of litter and refuse.

Base: Place Survey 2008/09 (352 local authorities), BVPI 2006 and 2003 (387 local authorities) Source: Ipsos MORI

57% 60% 63% 69% 59% 55% 54% 52% 58% 65% 56% 63% 67% 51% 63%

40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

2003 2008

Year surveyed Satisfaction

Average District Mets & Unitaries LB Inner London Outer London

2006

Place Survey covers more than just councils…

47% 45% 49% 49% 50% 50%

Average In Districts In Mets & Unitaries In London boroughs Inner London Outer London

Satisfaction w ith local police forces similar to that

• f councils

% Satisfied Q Please indicate how satisfied or dissatisfied you are with each of the following public services in your local area?…Your local police force

Base: Place Survey 2008/09 (121 local authorities: 49 district councils, 33 London boroughs, 25 Metropolitan districts and 14 unitary authorities) Source: Ipsos MORI

26% 27% 26% 29% 31% 29%

Average In Districts In Mets & Unitaries In London boroughs Inner London Outer London

Local agencies doing badly on the “new single confidence” measure

% Agree

Q And how much would you agree or disagree that the police and other local public services are successfully dealing with these issues [anti-social behaviour and crime] in your local area?

Base: Place Survey 2008/09 (352 local authorities: 201 district councils, 33 London boroughs, 36 Metropolitan districts and 55 unitary authorities) Source: Ipsos MORI

77% 80% 75% 69% 67% 70%

Average In Districts In Mets & Unitaries In London boroughs Inner London Outer London

GPs better rated, but London stands out

% Satisfied Q Please indicate how satisfied or dissatisfied you are with each of the following public services in your local area?…Your GP

Base: Place Survey 2008/09 (121 local authorities: 49 district councils, 33 London boroughs, 25 Metropolitan districts and 14 unitary authorities) Source: Ipsos MORI

54% 56% 53% 47% 40% 51%

Average In Districts In Mets & Unitaries In London boroughs Inner London Outer London

… even dentists better rated than councils

% Satisfied Q Please indicate how satisfied or dissatisfied you are with each of the following public services in your local area?…Your local dentist

Base: Place Survey 2008/09 (121 local authorities: 49 district councils, 33 London boroughs, 25 Metropolitan districts and 14 unitary authorities) Source: Ipsos MORI

Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics? Tw o key points:

• understand w hat is driving these

perceptions – both w hat is in your control and w hat is not

• look more carefully at local

neighbourhoods w ithin authorities

The Perils of Perception – much is beyond your control…. For example overall quality of life can nearly all be explained by just five background factors…

R2 = 54%

50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 IMD Satisfaction with local area

Base: All valid responses, 323 local authorities, Place Survey 2008/09 Source: Ipsos MORI

Very strong relationship w ith deprivation…

Newham Barking and Dagenham Rushmoor Kingston upon Hull Barrow in Furness Westminster Hart South Hams Thurrock Liverpool Hackney Slough Ribble Valley

R

R2 = 49%

50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 40% 50% 60% 70% No dependent children Satisfaction

Base: All valid responses, 323 local authorities, Place Survey 2008/09 Source: Ipsos MORI

…but even very simple measures like proportion of dependent children

Barking and Dagenham Hackney Richmond upon Thames Boston City of London South Holland Ashfield Sandwell Milton Keynes Newham

In fact w e can explain 82% of variation in quality of life know ing only…

Degree level or higher qualifications Households living in homes with 0.5 people or fewer per room IMD Proportion under 21 Geographic region – NE happy, London unhappy

R

R2 = 77%

50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Predicted satisfaction Actual satisfaction

Base: All valid responses, 323 local authorities, Place Survey 2008/09 Source: Ipsos MORI

We can accurately predict quality of life know ing

• nly these factors

Thurrock Kingston upon Hull Knowsley Forest Heath Newham Barking & Dagenham Ribble Valley South Hams South Cambs

The Ipsos MORI Area Challenge Index:

Who’s most universally challenged?

Area Challenge index

Looking across all measures, what are the background factors that are largely beyond the control of local services that are most related to perceptions? Identified seven domains which when combined generate a score form 1 to 100 for each local authority: The Indices of Multiple Deprivation Ethnic diversity (the level of ethnic fractionalisation) Young people Population churn Physical living conditions Urbanity Region

Area Challenge index

The five most and least challenged metropolitan and unitary authorities

72 72 71 70 72

29 28 20 20 14 Manchester Blackburn with Darwen Birmingham Leicester Luton Most challenged Least challenged Isle of Wight North Lincolnshire East Riding of Yorkshire Herefordshire County Rutland

Area Challenge index

The five most and least challenged London boroughs

88 86 81 78 100

50 48 47 46 38 Newham Hackney Tower Hamlets Barking and Dagenham Haringey Most challenged Least challenged Kensington and Chelsea Richmond Bromley Havering City of London

Area Challenge index

The five most and least challenged districts

60 59 56 56 61

7 6 6 1 1 Oxford Burnley Hastings Preston Pendle Most challenged Least challenged* Castle Morpeth South Shropshire Tynedale Alnwick Teesdale

*All five of the least challenged districts are now part of new unitary authorities

But there are things you can do… Quality of life heavily impacted by

• sense of belonging
• ASB, respect and liveability
• services provided by key agencies

like the council and police

Local public services really matter to a sense of place

• 6%

Positive drivers Negative drivers

• 5%

15%

• 4%

14% 11% 8% 7% 5% 5% 5% 5%

• 6%
• 4%

Belong to immediate neighbourhood Satisfaction with the way the local council runs things Safe to go out during the day Satisfied with parks and

• pen spaces

People not treating each other with respect People using or dealing drugs Keeping public land clear of litter and refuse Local public services working to make the area cleaner and greener Satisfied with local police force People from different backgrounds get on well together Safe to go out after dark Noisy neighbours or loud parties Vandalism, graffiti and other deliberate damage to property Rubbish and litter lying around

Satisfied with local area

38.7% of variation explained by model Source: Ipsos MORI

R

R2 = 83%

50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% ASB Satisfaction

Base: All valid responses, 323 local authorities, Place Survey 2008/09 Source: Ipsos MORI

Importance of ASB can’t be overstated…

Tower Hamlets Hackney Rossendale Hyndburn Thurrock Broadland Newham Barking & Dagenham Westminster South Hams

For councils, a few key visible services matter most - and informing and listening

Drivers of satisfaction: The w ay the Council run things

11% 10% 6% 5%

• 4%

10% 10% 9% 8% 6% 6% 5% 5% 5%

Overall satisfaction with local area Overall, well informed about local public services Treated with respect by local public services Satisfied with your local police force Owner occupied tenure Satisfied with refuse collection Keeping public land clear of litter and refuse Residents can influence decisions Well informed about how your council tax is spent Local public services treat all types of people fairly Local public services act on the concerns of local residents Successfully deal with issues Local public services working to make the area cleaner and greener Satisfied with local bus service

Satisfied with council Positive drivers Negative drivers

45.7% of variation explained by model Source: Ipsos MORI

R

R2 = 52%

25% 35% 45% 55% 65% 75% 25% 35% 45% 55% 65% Informed Satisfaction

Broadland

Base: All valid responses, 131 local authorities, Place Survey 2008 Source: Ipsos MORI

No councils that communicate w ell are poorly rated overall

City of London Wandsworth Kensington & Chelsea Westminster Rochdale Epping Forest Hammersmith & Fulham Gedling North Norfolk Rother

R

R2 = 8%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% £ 6 £ 7 £ 8 £ 9 £ 1 , £ 1 , 1 £ 1 , 2 £ 1 , 3 £ 1 , 4 £ 1 , 5 £ 1 , 6 £ 1 , 7 Average council tax per dwelling Satisfaction with council

Source: Ipsos MORI

Council tax vs. satisfaction w ith council

Wandsworth City of London Kensington & Chelsea Westminster Richmond upon Thames Oldham Rushcliffe

On crime measures, it is a lot about respect – and parenting

Drivers of ASB: understanding w here to focus your efforts

12%

• 27%

11% 10% 9% 7% 6%

• 6%
• 6%
• 5%

Safe to go out after dark People not treating each other with respect Social/council renter Satisfied with local transport information Most need improving – clean streets Keeping public land clear of litter and refuse Safe to go out during the day Parents take enough responsibility for the behaviour of children

Anti-social problems

Ethnicity - white Successfully deal with issues

Positive drivers Negative drivers

42.1% of variation explained by model Source: Ipsos MORI

But can dig deeper into Place – look at how view s vary at more local levels w ithin authorities Using new Ipsos MORI mapping tool:

• key benefit is that doesn’t rely on official

geography

• can see real patterns of perceptions in

contour maps

• identify hotspots of concern

So for example, cross-boundary areas of dissatisfaction w ith area are not missed

…or dissatisfaction w ith council

Can compare responses on different questions – to help target local actions

Chase Chase Chase Chase

Satisfaction with council Feelings of influence

Can show the importance of individual services?

Satisfaction with GPs Whether public services treat you with respect

Who’s outperforming the “Area Challenge Index”?

We will soon produce full Frontiers tables for all English authorities – initial analysis of c150 authorities suggests that following are “outperformers”: Satisfaction with Council – Wandsworth: actual satisfaction 75%, model predicts 60% Satisfaction with area – lots in the North East eg Sunderland, Gateshead and Middlesbrough Levels of cohesion – Manchester: actual cohesion measure 74%, model predicts 65%

Conclusions

Real challenges for local government in getting recognition for improvements UK public services are awash with data

–big issue is how we use it to improve quality

• f life

–especially as money runs out

Over to you!

Thank you

ben.page@ ipsos.com