communities and local government committee reforming local ...€¦ · needs formula (rnf) in...
TRANSCRIPT
FINANCE WITH VISION
LG Futures Ltd., Marlowe House, Watling Street, Hockliffe, Leighton Buzzard LU7 9LS | www.lgfutures.co.uk | T. 01908 410811 Incorporated in England and Wales under registration number: 05308266 | VAT registration number: 855940493
Communities and Local Government Committee Reforming Local Authority Needs Assessment
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
October 2017
Contents
Contents 2
1. Key Points ................................................................................................ 3
2. Scope of the Analysis ............................................................................... 5
Population projections and estimates 8 Road lengths and geographic data 9 Income- and employment-related benefits 9 Socio-economic and demographic data 10 Disability-related benefits 11 Additional population measurements 11 Past expenditure and debt 12 Area Cost Adjustment (ACA) 12
3. Possible Additional Indicators ................................................................. 21
4. Conclusions ............................................................................................ 23
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 3
1. Key Points
This paper examines the indicators used by DCLG in the calculation of the Relative
Needs Formula (RNF) in 2013/14. It focuses on the timeliness of the indicators, and
whether up-to-date data could be used in future needs assessment formulae.
DCLG uses criteria to determine the appropriateness of indicators for use in the
formula. This includes whether or not the data can be influenced by local authority
discretion, whether it is open to manipulation, whether it creates any perverse
incentives for local authorities, and whether any variations in the data could lead to
misleading conclusions.
A key issue for future needs assessment formulae is the timeliness of the data,
and whether existing data sources could be updated. LG Futures has provided a
summary of the broad indicator categories used in the current RNF (excluding Police
and Fire & Rescue), based on the ease with which they could be updated. This
summary draws on analysis carried out by DCLG as part of its Fair Funding Review.
Population projections and estimates are one of the most important determinants
of assessed needs in the current formula. Up-to-date projections would be available
as part of any new needs assessment formula, incorporating the results of the 2011
census and subsequent projections of births, deaths and migration.
Demographic and socio-economic data, taken from the 2001 census, are used
extensively throughout the current formula. It would be possible to update these
figures based on the 2011 census; however, these would be several years old
once the next needs assessment formula is calculated.
A major challenge will be updating income- and employment-related benefit data.
These are used as a proxy for deprivation for a number of services. Given the ongoing
roll-out of Universal Credit, it may not be possible to obtain benefit statistics that are
comparable between local authorities. As a result, DCLG may be limited to using benefit
data from 2013 or older.
Some disability-related benefits used in the current formula will also be affected by the
introduction of Universal Credit, and so the existing data sources could not be updated.
Measurements of additional population – including net in-commuters, day visitor
and overnight visitor numbers – are presently out of date. Data on commuter
numbers could be updated based on the results of the 2011 census. Data on overnight
visitor numbers are now very old, and new estimates would need to be produced.
Previous attempts to model updated day visitor numbers proved challenging, and
DCLG reports that the results were rejected by local government.
Existing sources of road length and other geographical data could be updated,
though in some cases this would require the purchase or commissioning of the
necessary data.
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 4
Indicators based on past expenditure and debt, and data used to calculate the Area
Cost Adjustment, could be updated using existing data sources.
DCLG has not yet proposed a final set of indicators be used in future needs assessment
formulae, but has published an initial ‘long list’ of cost drivers for further consideration.
This paper lists the additional cost drivers which are not included in the current Relative
Needs Formula. These are still at discussion stage and, given a lack of detail, it is not
yet possible to fully assess whether indicators that reflect these cost drivers would be
appropriate for use in a future formula.
Once the final group of indicators has been identified, DCLG will need to select those
indicators to be included in the final formula. In the current needs assessment formula,
indicators were selected and assigned weights using both judgement and statistical
techniques. The choice of indicators will be of significant interest to local authorities, as
it will create ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ in terms of the resulting distribution of assessed
needs. The method used to select indicators for the simplified needs assessment
formula is currently being considered as part of the Fair Funding Review process.
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 5
2. Scope of the Analysis
2.1. Over 120 indicators were used to measure local authorities’ relative needs as part of the
current Relative Needs Formula (RNF).1 The RNF was the main determinant of each
authority’s Formula Funding, which was worth £17.9 billion in 2013/14, the final year in
which funding shares were calculated.2
2.2. DCLG employ a set of criteria for assessing whether indicators are appropriate for inclusion
in its needs assessment formulae. The following questions are currently considered when
determining whether a data source or indicator is appropriate for use in the formula:3
Is the data influenced by local policy discretion?
Can the data be open to manipulation by authorities?
Does the data create any perverse incentives? For example, ‘roads where
maintenance should be considered’ might be a key cost driver for Highway
Maintenance, but it would be a poor indicator for the formula, as it could theoretically
incentivise authorities to delay repairs.
Are there regional variations that are misleading? For example, lack of access to a car
may be a suitable indicator for deprivation in rural areas, but less so in urban areas
where residents are likely to have better access to public transport.
Is the data used elsewhere for policy calculations, and if so are there lessons to be
learnt?
How extensively has the data been validated by the provider?
If the data comes from a sample survey, is the sample size large enough for all
authorities?
How regularly can the data be updated?
2.3. DCLG therefore has a framework in place for determining what constitutes an appropriate
indicator. This section focuses primarily on last of these criteria: the timeliness of the
indicators, and the ability to update them. The needs assessment formula was last updated
in 2013/14, and now includes data that is over 25 years old, as well as a large number of
indicators derived from the 2001 census. Whether these indicators would be appropriate
for use in a future needs assessment formula will largely depend on whether or not they
can be updated.
1 DCLG and Local Government Association, Discussion 1: The Progress of the Fair Funding Review, from the Business Rates Retention Regional Consultation Event, 2017.
2 Excluding police authorities, the Greater London Authority and Isles of Scilly.
3 This list of requirements is part of DCLG’s current guidance, but was applied at least since 2006. See for example DCLG, Methods of Determining Relative Needs Formulae, Paper Presented at the 11th GSS Methodology Conference, June 2006.
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 6
2.4. This analysis focuses on the indicators used to calculate the Relative Needs Formula
(excluding emergency services). This is a subset of indicators used to allocate Formula
Funding, as it excludes Tailored Grants which were allocated using their own bespoke
criteria, rather than the Relative Needs Formula. The Relative Needs Formula was used to
estimate needs for 16 services, each of was assigned a different weighting or control total,
as shown in the table below.
Table 1: Relative Needs Formula – Breakdown by service block 2013/14
Service Block Sub-block Control total
Children’s Services
Youth & Community 1.2%
Central Education Functions 4.9%
Children’s Social Care 9.7%
Adult Social Services Older People 19.1%
Younger Adults 12.9%
Police 11.7%
Fire & Rescue 4.3%
Highway Maintenance 2.9%
Environmental, Protective & Cultural Services (EPCS)
District-level EPCS 15.1%
County-level EPCS 9.0%
Concessionary Travel 1.7%
Flood Defence 0.1%
Continuing EA Levies 0.0%
Coast Protection 0.0%
Fixed Costs 0.2%
Capital Financing 7.3%
Total 100.0%
2.5. As part of the analysis, we considered the data that was used to construct each indicator in
the current needs assessment formula. This draws on two key sources of information:
The data definitions and guidance that accompanied the 2013/14 local government
finance settlement;4 and
Papers produced by DCLG for the Needs and Redistribution Technical Working
Group, which provide a full list of indicators, their sources, and the availability of data
for future updates.5
4 DCLG, Calculating the 2013-14 Formula Funding, December 2012 and DCLG, Data Definitions of Indicators for 2013-14 (Parts 1 and 2), December 2012. 5 DCLG, Indicators used in the 2013-14 allocation of the Start-up Funding Assessment, meeting held 4 July 2106, http://www.local.gov.uk/topics/finance-and-business-rates/business-rates/business-rates-retention-minutes-agendas-and-papers
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 7
2.6. Each indicator has been assigned to one of four categories, corresponding to how easily
the data can be updated.6 The categories used in this report are described in the table
below. It should be emphasised the categories used in this report are based on LG Futures’
own assessment based on the best available information and do not necessarily reflect the
views of DCLG, nor does the availability of data necessarily mean that DCLG will choose
to update the indicator.
Table 2: Ability to update indicators
Update
Status Description Example(s)
The data can be updated using the
existing source, and the data source
is updated frequently (every one to
two years).
Population projections, which are updated
by ONS every two years.
Pupil numbers from the annual School
Census.
The data can be updated using the
existing source; however the data
source is only updated periodically
(e.g. decennial census).
Replacing data from the 2001 census with
data from the 2011 census.
The data could be updated, but this
would involve a cost, in terms of
financial expenditure and/or the time
required to produce new estimates.
Updating local authority estimates of
foreign and domestic visitor nights requires
the purchase of data.
The data source is no longer
available, or previous attempts to
update the indicator were rejected
by local government.
The partial roll-out of Universal Credit
means benefit numbers are no longer
directly comparable across local
authorities.
Previous attempts to update estimates of
day visitors to each local authority were
rejected by local authorities.
2.7. Given the large number of indicators used in the Relative Needs Formula, it would not be
possible to provide a detailed assessment every data source. LG Futures has therefore
sought to simplify and summarise the analysis by creating eight major categories as follows:
Population projections and estimates
Road lengths and geographic data
Income- and employment-related benefits
Socio-economic and demographic data
Disability-related benefits
Additional population measurements
Past expenditure and debt
6 The categories used in this report are different to those used in DCLG’s original paper.
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 8
The Area Cost Adjustment
2.8. The remainder of this section provides commentary on each of these categories, and the
ability to update their constituent indicators as part of any future needs assessment formula.
The table below provides a general summary of each category.
Table 3: Categories used in the current Relative Needs Formula (exc. emergency services)
Broad indicator category General ability to update indicators Status of
indicators
Population projections and
estimates
Can generally be updated using existing data
sources.
Road lengths and geographic data
Some data can be updated but must be
purchased and/or new estimates must be
produced.
Income- and employment-related
benefits
Cannot be updated using the existing data
source, due to the roll out of Universal Credit.
Socio-economic and demographic
data
Can be updated using data from the 2011
census.
Disability-related benefits Two indicators can be updated using existing
data sources, but one indicator cannot.
Additional population
measurements
Some existing indicators can be updated
using data from the 2011 census; some data
can be updated but must be purchased
and/or new estimates must be produced;
some indicators cannot be updated using the
existing data source.
Past expenditure and debt Can generally be updated using existing data
sources.
Area Cost Adjustment Can generally be updated using existing data
sources.
Population projections and estimates
2.9. Population projections are one of the most important determinants of local authorities’
assessed needs. For each service, assessed needs are typically calculated using a basic
‘client group’, and then a top-up for each client. In most cases, the ‘client group’ is the
projected population for each authority, or the specific age band relevant to the service in
question (for example, residents aged 0 to 17 for Children’s Social Care).
2.10. For most services, this is based on the 2011-based Sub-national Population Projections,
which are produced by the Office for National Statistics (ONS). This is the case for Youth &
Community, Children’s Social Care, Adult Social Services, and district- and county-level
Environmental, Protective and Cultural Services (EPCS). These population projections take
the 2011 Census as their starting point, ‘age on’ the population each year, and then adjust
for estimated births, deaths and net migration (internal and international), based on recent
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 9
trends for each local authority. These projections are updated every two years by ONS, with
the latest projections being released in May 2016.
2.11. ONS’ population estimates are similarly based on the most recent census, aged-on by one
year and adjusted for births, deaths and migration, but these are not projected into the
future. Timely population projections and estimates would therefore be available for any
revised needs assessment formula.
2.12. For Local Authority Central Education Functions, the ‘client group’ is the number of pupils
aged 3 to 18 who are resident or attending school in each local authority. This is based on
the School Census, produced by the Department for Education (DfE). This is produced
annually and so is not likely to present challenges for future updates.
Road lengths and geographic data
2.13. For Highway Maintenance, the ‘client group’ is actually the length of roads in each local
authorities (kilometres), weighted by road type. DCLG reports that this data now needs to
be updated. This is likely to include updates to the way in which road length is measured;
for example, potentially using geographic information systems (GIS) data to define roads
as either rural or urban, rather than using speed limits to distinguish between ‘built-up’ and
‘non built-up’ roads as is currently the case.
2.14. Geographic data includes the days with snow laying and predicted gritting days. These are
also used in the Highway Maintenance formula. This is generally based on averages
between 1978 and 1990 (for snow) and between 1992 and 2002 (for gritting), where this
data was available. DCLG is of the view that this data now needs updating as weather
patterns have changed. This data would need to be purchased from the Met Office.
Income- and employment-related benefits
2.15. Benefit data is used extensively throughout the current needs assessment formula as a
proxy for deprivation. This is based on means-tested benefits, for which eligibility is based
on individuals’ (or households’) income or employment status.
2.16. A major challenge when updating the needs assessment formula will be to find a
replacement for benefit data. This is complicated by the ongoing roll-out of Universal Credit,
which replaces a number of means-tested benefits. This includes income-based
Jobseekers Allowance and Income Support, based on data from the Department of Work
and Pensions (DWP), and Child Tax Credit, based on data from HM Revenue & Customs
(HMRC), which are used in the current Relative Needs Formula.
2.17. These benefits are used in the needs assessment formulae for the following services:
Children’s Services – Youth and Community
Children’s Services – LA Central Education Functions
Children’s Services – Children’s Social Care
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 10
Social Services for Older Adults
Social Services for Younger Adults
District-level EPCS
County-level EPCS
2.18. Universal Credit was introduced to pilot areas in October 2013 for single claimants, and,
since 2016, has been expanded to Job Centres in all areas of the country and begun to
include all claimant types. However, existing claimants remain on the old benefits and tax
credits, and the migration of these ‘legacy’ claims to Universal Credit is not expected to start
until July 2019.7 DCLG has stated that ‘until all of the country is receiving universal credit it
will not be possible to use this data to calculate needs’, but also noted that ‘ONS and DWP
are working to provide statistics on claimant count that are comparable across areas.’8
2.19. ONS have now developed a new ‘claimant count’ which measures the proportion of the
population (ages 16 to 64) claiming benefits principally for the reason of being unemployed,
whether through Universal Credit or the older Jobseeker’s Allowance.9 However, this
claimant count will still be affected by the roll-out status of Universal Credit in each local
area, meaning the proportion of residents counted as unemployed is not measured on an
entirely like-for-like basis.
2.20. In the absence of an alternative comparable data source, benefit data would need to be
taken from 2013 or earlier to avoid the issues associated with Universal Credit. This could
lead to local authorities challenging the timeliness of the data.
Socio-economic and demographic data
2.21. A wide range of socio-economic and demographic data are used in the needs assessment
formula. The main source of this data is the 2001 census. This includes data used to
calculate population density and sparsity, as well as demographic and socio-economic
variables, such as ethnicity; country of birth; qualifications; occupation; employment history;
household composition; living arrangements; housing tenure; and commuter numbers.
2.22. The current Relative Needs Formula was calculated after the 2011 census was conducted.
This enabled DCLG to use population projections which took this most recent census as
7 Written Parliamentary Statement on Welfare Reform, 20 July 2016
(http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-
statement/Lords/2016-07-20/HLWS98/)
8 Technical Working Group on Needs & Redistribution, Meeting 4 July 2016 http://www.local.gov.uk/business-
rates
9 See for example the following ONS methodology document: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotinwork/outofworkbenefits/methodologies/revisionstotheclaimantcountfromtheinclusionoffulluniversalcreditserviceclaimants
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 11
their starting point. However, there was insufficient time to update the other indicators which
continued to be taken from the 2001 census.
2.23. In future needs assessment formulae, DCLG would be able to use data from the 2011
census. ONS reports that the questions included in the 2011 census are either ‘fully
comparable’ or ‘broadly comparable’ with the 2001 census,10 meaning that it should be
possible to update each indicator. The census data could be further updated in 2021, which
the government intends to be the last census; after that, administrative and survey data
sources will be used to generate the statistics.
2.24. A drawback of the census is that it is only carried out every decade, and so the data in any
future needs assessment formulae would be several years old. Nevertheless, given that the
census collects information on a wide range of variables which are not otherwise captured
by administrative data sources, and enables a statistically-robust comparison between local
authorities, it is likely to remain an indispensable source of data for the next needs
assessment formula.
Disability-related benefits
2.25. Disability-related benefits included in the current needs assessment formula include
Incapacity Benefit and Severe Disablement Allowance (the EPCS formula), Attendance
Allowance (Social Services for Older People formula), and Disability Living Allowance
(Social Services for Younger Adults formula).
2.26. The first of these indicators (Incapacity Benefit and Severe Disablement Allowance) will be
affected by the roll-out of Universal Credit, and so it would not be possible to update this
data in future needs assessment formulae. This remaining two indicators will not be affected
by Universal Credit, and could be updated using existing data sources.
Additional population measurements
2.27. Additional population measurements reflect the additional demand for local services by
people other than usual residents. These include:
Net in-commuters (for the EPCS and Highway Maintenance formulae);
Domestic and foreign visitors staying the night in a local authority (Highway
Maintenance formula); and
Day visitors (EPCS formulae).
10 Office for National Statistics, 2011-2001 Census in England and Wales Questionnaire Comparability, December 2012.
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 12
2.28. Net in-commuters are based on census data, and so could be updated to reflect the results
of the 2011 census.
2.29. The number of domestic and foreign overnight visitors are based on fairly recent survey
data (2008-2010 and 2009-11 respectively), but are not available at the shire district level.
Numbers were apportioned to the shire districts using older data, from as far back as 2002
and 1991 (for domestic and foreign visitors, respectively). Given the age of this data, this
will need to be updated, presumably requiring DCLG to produce modelled estimates for
some local authorities. DCLG report that some of this data was previously purchased from
the UK Tourism Board.
2.30. DCLG report that there is no consistent reliable source of data on the number of day visitors
to and from each local authority. As a result, the figures had to be estimated using a model,
which now includes data that is over 25 years old. Given the age of this data, it is highly
likely that visitor patterns have changed over time and now differ significantly from those
estimated by the model. DCLG reports that proposals for updating the indicator were set
out in 2005 and 2007, but the results were not widely accepted as reliable or were otherwise
rejected by local government.
Past expenditure and debt
2.31. Past expenditure is used in the needs assessment formula for a number of minor services,
including Flood Defence, Continuing Environmental Agency Levies and Coast Protection.
2.32. These appear to be inconsistent with DCLG’s principles that the indicators should not be
subject to manipulation by local authorities or perverse incentives, as, in theory, additional
expenditure by local authorities could result in greater funding. However some of this past
expenditure is based on levies, which may be beyond the control of local authorities to
influence. The control totals for these needs assessment formulae account for a very small
share of England authorities’ overall needs, so any financial incentives to manipulate
expenditure could be regarded as trivial.
2.33. For the Capital Financing formula, assessed needs is based on an estimated amount of
outstanding debt, which is used to calculate (i) an assumed rate of interest payments and
(ii) assumed capital repayments. Because this is based on historical debt, and the assumed
interest rates and capital repayments are the same for each local authority, this is not
subject to manipulation or perverse incentives. Being based on historical data, this would
not necessarily need to be updated as part of any future needs assessment formula.
Area Cost Adjustment (ACA)
2.34. The ACA measures the different costs of providing local services in different geographical
areas to due to variations in wage and salary costs (and, to a lesser extent, differences in
business rates paid on local authority premises). The labour cost element of the ACA draws
on wage data from the Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (ASHE), a 1% sample of all
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 13
employees in employment.11 Regression analysis was carried out to measure the average
difference in wages between geographic areas while controlling for age, gender, occupation
and industry.
2.35. The Area Cost Adjustment is not calculated for every local authority, but rather for 53 larger
geographical areas in England and Wales. Because wage data is drawn from a sample, the
results would not be statistically robust if they were calculated at the local authority level –
at this level, differences could be due to chance, rather than meaningful differences in
labour costs. To minimise the risk of these statistical errors, the ACA was therefore
calculated a broader geographical level.
2.36. Because the ACA is based largely on the annual ASHE data set, it is likely that this indicator
could be updated in future years should DCLG choose to do so.
2.37. The ACA has attracted significant debate in the past.12 Some of the issues debated include
the following:
The ACA geography in which each local authority is grouped (for example, with some
London boroughs in the Outer London geography arguing that they should be in the
Inner London grouping);
The level of spatial disaggregation at which the ACA is calculated;
Whether the ASHE is an appropriate data source, given that it does not have
information on workers’ qualifications; and
Whether the differences in wages measured by the ACA, based on both private and
public sector income data, overstates the difference in authorities’ labour costs given
the existence of national pay scales.
2.38. A full review of the ACA was carried out by DCLG between 2008 and 2010. Nevertheless,
the ACA is likely to continue to be highly contentious, given the major impact it has on
funding allocations across England. For example, for social services, the ACA increased
the assessed needs of some Inner London authorities by 19.7% relative to authorities in
parts of England with the lowest wage costs.
2.39. The following tables provide a list of the indicators used for each service’s Relative Needs
Formula (excluding Police and Fire & Rescue).
11 DCLG, Methodology Guide for the Area Cost Adjustment 2013/14. 12 See for example NERA Economic Consulting¸ Area Cost Adjustment: A Response to the DCLG’s recent consultations, January 2010 http://www.nera.com/content/dam/nera/publications/archive1/PUB_ACA_Jan2010.pdf
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 14
Table 4: Children’s Services – Youth & Community
Indicator Source(s) Date of data Update
Status
Projected population aged 13-19 in
2013
ONS: Sub-national Population
Projections 2011
Children in out-of-work families
receiving Child Tax Credit, above a
threshold
HMRC 2008 - 2011
ONS: Mid-Year Population
Estimates 2011
Secondary pupils in low-achieving
ethnic groups, above a threshold DfE: School Census 2012
Table 5: Children’s Services – Local Authority Central Education Functions
Indicator Source(s) Date of data Update
Status
Pupils aged 3-18 (including resident
pupils)
DfE: School Census 2012
DfE: Pupil Referral Unit Census 2012
DfE: Alternative Provision Census 2012
DfE: Early Years Census 2012
Children in out-of-work families
receiving Child Tax Credit, above a
threshold
HMRC 2008 - 2011
ONS: Mid-year Population Estimates 2011
Population sparsity, at the ward level ONS: 2001 Census 2001
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 15
Table 6: Children’s Services – Children’s Social Care
Indicator Source(s) Date of data Update
Status
Projected population aged 0-17 in
2013
ONS: Sub-national Population
Projections 2011
People aged 18-64 receiving certain
income and employment related
benefits
DWP: Work and Pensions
Longitudinal Study (WPLS) 2009 - 2012
DWP: DWP Computer System 2009 - 2011
ONS: Mid-Year Population Estimates 2011
Children in out-of-work families
receiving Child Tax Credit
HMRC 2008 - 2011
ONS: Mid-year Population Estimates 2011
Children without good health ONS: 2001 Census 2001
Children in black ethnic groups ONS: 2001 Census 2001
People in mixed ethnic groups ONS: 2001 Census 2001
People in other ethnic groups ONS: 2001 Census 2001
People aged 16 to 74 whose highest
qualification attained was level 1 or 2 ONS: 2001 Census 2001
People aged 16 to 74 whose highest
qualification attained was level 4 or 5 ONS: 2001 Census 2001
Females aged 16-74 looking after
home and/or family ONS: 2001 Census 2001
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 16
Table 7: Social Services for Older People
Indicator Source(s) Date of data Update
Status
Projected household and supported
residents aged 65 and over in 2013
ONS: Sub-national Population
Projections 2011
ONS: Mid-Year Population Estimates 2011 ONS: 2001 Census 2001
NHS: Adult Social Care Combined
Activity Return (ASC-CAR) 2011
The ratio of older residents aged 90+
ONS: Mid-Year Population Estimates 2011
ONS: 2001 Census 2001
NHS: Adult Social Care Combined
Activity Return (ASC-CAR) 2011
Older adults receiving Attendance
Allowance
DWP: Work and Pensions
Longitudinal Study (WPLS) 2008 - 2011
Older adults living in rented
accommodation ONS: 2001 Census 2001
Older adults living alone ONS: 2001 Census 2001
Population sparsity among older
residents ONS: 2001 Census 2001
Older adults receiving certain income
and employment related benefits
DWP: Work and Pensions
Longitudinal Study (WPLS) 2009 - 2012
DWP: DWP Computer System 2009 - 2011
ONS: Mid-Year Population Estimates 2011
Table 8: Social Services for Younger Adults
Indicator Source(s) Date of data Update
Status
Projected population aged 18-64 in
2013
ONS: Sub-national Population
Projections 2011
Adults aged 18-64 who work in
routine or semi-routine occupations ONS: 2001 Census 2001
Households with no family ONS: 2001 Census 2001
Adults aged 18-64 who are long-term
unemployed or have never worked ONS: 2001 Census 2001
Adults aged 18-64 receiving
Disability Living Allowance
DWP: Work and Pensions
Longitudinal Study (WPLS) 2009 - 2012
ONS: Mid-Year Population Estimates 2011
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 17
Table 9: Highway Maintenance
Indicator Source(s) Date of data Update
Status
Weighted road length DfT: Road network database 2012
DfT: R199b form 2012
Traffic Flow, all motor vehicles DfT: Information provided by private
contractors and Highway Authorities
on behalf of DfT
2009 - 2011 Traffic Flow, heavy goods vehicles,
buses and coaches
Domestic visitor nights(a) VisitBritain: UK Tourism Survey 2002 - 2010
ONS: Index of place names 2002 - 2004
Foreign visitor nights(a)
ONS: International Passenger
Survey 2009 - 2011
ONS: 1991 Census 1991
Net in-commuters(a) ONS: 2001 Census 2001
Resident population(a) ONS: Mid-Year Population Estimates 2011
Days with snow lying Meteorological Office 1978 - 1990
Predicted gritting days Meteorological Office 1992 - 2002
(a) In the final formula, these four indicators are used to construct the indicator ‘daytime visitors per
kilometre’.
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 18
Table 10: Environmental, Protective and Cultural Services (district- and county-level)
Indicator Source(s) Date of data Update
Status
Projected population in 2013 ONS: Sub-national Population
Projections 2011
Population sparsity ONS: 2001 Census 2001
Population density
ONS: 2001 Census 2001
ONS: Mid-Year Population Estimates 2011
County of birth of residents ONS: 2001 Census 2001
Day visitors
Leisure Day Visits Survey 1988 - 1989
ONS: 1991 Census 1991
National Tourist Boards: 1991
Survey of Visits to Tourist Attractions 1991
ONS: 1991 Census of Employment 1991
Other information about urban areas,
National Parks, areas of outstanding
national beauty and official bathing
beaches
Not specified
Net in-commuters ONS: 2001 Census 2001
Older adults receiving certain income
and employment related benefits(a)
DWP: Work and Pensions
Longitudinal Study (WPLS) 2009 - 2012
DWP: DWP Computer System 2009 - 2011
People receiving certain income and
employment related benefits
DWP: Work and Pensions
Longitudinal Study (WPLS) 2009 - 2012
DWP: DWP Computer System 2009 - 2011
Incapacity Benefit and Severe
Disablement Allowance
DWP: Work and Pensions
Longitudinal Study (WPLS) 2009 - 2012
Unemployment related benefit
claimants
ONS: National Online Manpower
Information System (NOMIS) 2012
(a) This indicator is included in the district-level EPCS formula but not the county-level EPCS formula.
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 19
Table 11: Other EPCS services
Indicator Source(s) Date of data Update
Status
Concessionary Travel
Modelled boardings
ONS: Mid-Year Population Estimates 2009 - 2010
ONS: Rural / urban status Not specified
ONS: Annual Population Survey 2010-2011
DfT: Public Service Vehicle Operator
Survey 2010-2011
DfT: Light rail operators survey
DfT: National Public Transport Data
Repository 2009-2010
DfT: Vehicle registration statistics
based on DVLA data 2010
Flood Defence
Internal drainage board (IDB) levies
expenditure
DEFRA: Annual Reports of Internal
Drainage Boards 2012-13
Ordinary watercourses not covered
by internal drainage board Environment Agency Not specified
Continuing EA Levies
Environment agency (England) levy DEFRA 2012-13
Coast Protection
Coast protection expenditure DCLG: General Fund Revenue
Accounts Returns 2008-2011
Capital Financing
Interest rate
PWLB
2012 Bank of England
CIPFA
Assumed outstanding debt
Outstanding debt as at 1 April 1990 1990
Credit approvals 1990 to 2004 1990-2004
Supported Capital Expenditure
(Revenue) 2004-2011
Assumed capital repayments N/A
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 20
Table 12: Area Cost Adjustment
Indicator Source(s) Date of data Update
Status
ACA for (i) Education, (ii) Children’s
Social Care and Younger Adults’
Personal Social Services, (iii) Older
People’s Personal Social Services,
(iv) Highway Maintenance, and (v)
Environmental, Protective and
Cultural Services.
ONS: Annual Survey of Hours and
Earnings 2009-2011
ONS: Annual Business Inquiry Part 2 2007
DBIS: Small and Medium Enterprise
(SME) statistics 2008
DCLG: Subjective Analysis Return 2005-2008
DCLG: Trading Services Revenue
accounts 2005-08
DCLG: Revenue Outturn forms 2007-08
Base Estimate Returns 1992-93
VOA: Business Floorspace 2012
VOA: Revaluation of Local Authority
Schools 2010
DCLG: National Non-Domestic
Rates Provisional Contributions
Return
2010-11
NHS: Council Personal Social
Services Gross Expenditures PSS
EX1
2008
Publicly available company accounts Not specified
ONS: Mid-Year Population Estimates 2011
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 21
3. Possible Additional Indicators
3.1. DCLG has published a long-list of ‘cost drivers’ for local services, which could potentially
be used as indicators in future needs assessment formulae.13 The long list is based on
papers discussed by the Needs and Redistribution Working Group and put forward by other
government departments. It is DCLG’s intention that the list should be significantly
shortened, first through an engagement process and then through statistical techniques (to
be determined) which would help identify those cost drivers that are ‘key’.
3.2. The following is a list of additional cost drivers mentioned by DCLG, which are not already
included as indicators in the existing Relative Needs Formula. We only list those cost drivers
that are presented as a measurable indicator, rather than general descriptions such as
‘deprivation’. A definition, rationale and data source was not provided for the cost drivers,
and so it is not possible to comment on their appropriateness for use in a formula. However,
some of the cost drivers appear to be at odds with DCLG’s criteria that indicators should
not be subject to manipulation or perverse incentives; for example, the proposal to use
actual client numbers for children’s social care.
3.3. For Adult Social Care, additional indicators included in the long list include:
Number of people aged 85 and over with a limiting (significantly) condition per person
aged 65 and over.
Number of couple households aged 65 and over per household aged 65 and over
Number of home owner households (outright ownership only) aged 65 and over per
household aged 65 and over
Number of properties in Council Tax bands A to E as a proportion of all Council Tax
banded properties
Number of properties in Council Tax bands F to H as a proportion of all Council Tax
banded properties
Number of people ages 16 to 64 whose day-to-day activities are limited a lot per
person aged 16 to 64
Portion of people aged 16 to 64 who are aged 16 to 24
3.4. For Children’s Social Care and Youth Services, additional indicators include:
Service demand measurements, including the number or rate of care applications,
children who are the subject of a child protection plan, care leavers eligible for care
leaver support, and specialist Special Education Needs (SEN) places.
13 DCLG, A long list of possible cost drivers by the Department for Communities and Local Government, Needs & Redistribution Working Group, January 2017.
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 22
Radicalisation: the number of children and families which require intensive
intervention and the number of children with complex needs (exact criteria not
specified).
Unaccompanied asylum seeking children.
Awareness: differing prevalence of awareness raising campaigns on child abuse and
neglect.
Number of young people not in education, employment or training.
Number of young people up to 25 with disabilities.
3.5. For Highway Maintenance, only one additional indicator is included in the long list, namely
the cost of oil.
3.6. Homelessness does not currently have its own Relative Needs Formula, but suggested
cost drivers are:
Number of local authority acceptances.
Cases of prevention / relief achieved by securing a private rented sector tenancy.
Differing rental costs across the country.
Additional cost of housing larger families in some areas.
High numbers of historic temporary accommodation in some areas.
3.7. Waste and Recycling also does not currently have its own Relative Needs Formula, but
long-listed cost drivers include:
Number of households.
Deprivation: Percent of population as social grade D and E; deprivation deciles from
the Indices of Multiple Deprivation.
Number of high rise blocks of flats.
Demand for municipal and civic amenity waste collection.
Varying capability for cost recovery.
Extent of service integration across local authorities.
3.8. For Cultural Services, an additional cost driver is the ‘local supply of cultural assets and
facilities’.
3.9. DCLG’s paper also mentions the fact that benefit data might not be sufficiently robust in
future formulae, given the introduction of Universal Credit. They state that another way to
reflect deprivation would be to use the Index of Multiple Deprivation. This measures seven
aspects of deprivation, namely: income; employment; health and disability; education, skills
and training; barriers to housing and services; crime; and living environment.
Paper 3 – Review of Needs Assessment Data Sources
FINANCE WITH VISION 23
4. Conclusions
4.1. DCLG has established a clear set of criteria for assessing the appropriateness of indicators
that could be included in the needs assessment formula. This rules out data that can be
influenced or manipulated by local authorities or creates perverse incentives, and ensures
that the indicators are statistically robust, comparable across local authorities, and are
relevant measurements of authorities’ ‘need to spend’ on services.
4.2. The main challenge facing DCLG is likely to be the timeliness of data, most notably the
need to update measures of ‘deprivation’ which at present are largely based on benefit and
tax credit data. Assuming these indicators continue to be used in future needs assessment
formula, it is possible that this will need to be based on older benefit data that precedes the
roll-out of Universal Credit.
4.3. Potentially, a large number of indicators meet DCLG’s criteria and could serve as
candidates for the revised needs assessment formula. A more controversial issue is likely
to be selection of indicators for use in the final formula. At present, indicators are included
in the formula (and assigned relative importance) using either judgement or statistical
techniques.
4.4. Either approach is likely to be controversial, given that the choice of one indicator over
another creates ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ among local authorities, given their varying
characteristics (such as population density, deprivation levels, age profiles, and so on). The
method that will be used to select indicators for the final formula is currently being
considered as part of DCLG’s Fair Funding Review.