In 2019, people from most ethnic minority groups were more likely than White British people to live in the most deprived neighbourhoods.

Between 2018 and 2022, people in households in the ‘other’, Asian and black ethnic groups were the most likely to be in persistent low income, both before and after housing costs, out of all ethnic groups.

Life expectancy (LE), healthy life expectancy (HLE), disability-free life expectancy (DFLE), Slope Index of Inequality (SII) and range by national deprivation deciles using the Index of Multiple Deprivation 2015 for data periods from 2011 to 2013 to 2015 to 2017, and the Index of Multiple Deprivation 2019 for data periods from 2016 to 2018 to 2018 to 2020: England, 2011 to 2013 to 2018 to 2020.

This method provides statistics on relative deprivation in England, Wales, and Scotland, including:

• The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) – a measure of overall deprivation
• Domain-specific indices (e.g., income, employment, education, health etc.) that differ by country
• Area rankings and deciles for simplified analysis

Area Types

The indices assess deprivation at a small-area level:

• England & Wales: Lower-layer Super Output Areas (LSOAs)
• Scotland: Data Zones

Ranking & Deciles

Each area is ranked from most to least deprived:

• England: 1 (most deprived) to 32,844 (least deprived)
• Wales: 1 (most deprived) to 1,909 (least deprived)
• Scotland: 1 (most deprived) to 6,976 (least deprived)

The ranks are available in the imdRank field, with domain-specific ranks in fields such as incomeRank, employmentRank, crimeRank, etc.

To simplify, areas are also categorized into deciles (1 = most deprived, 10 = least deprived), available in fields like imdDecile, incomeDecile, employmentDecile, etc.

Mapping & Consumer Platform Adjustments

We use deciles to color-code our deprivation map. However, on our consumer platform, we reversed the ratings scale to match user expectations where higher ratings are associated with higher deprivation.

For example, postcode W6 0LJ (imdDecile 2, a highly deprived area) is displayed as “_Index of Multiple Deprivation - 9/10 or high_” on the consumer platform.

Data Availability

• England & Wales: 2019
• Scotland: 2020

Abstract

The Born in Bradford study is tracking the health and wellbeing of over 13,500 children, and their parents born at Bradford Royal Infirmary between March 2007 and December 2010.

Documentation

Born in Bradford is a prospective pregnancy and birth cohort established to examine how genetic, nutritional, environmental, behavioral and social factors affect health and development during childhood, and subsequently adult life, in a deprived multi-ethnic population. It was developed in close consultation with local communities, clinicians and policy makers with commitment from the outset to undertake research that would both inform interventions to improve health in the city and generate robust science relevant to similar communities in the UK and across the world. Between 2007 and 2011 information on a wide range of characteristics were collected from 12,453 women (and 3,356 partners) who experienced 13,778 pregnancies and delivered 13,818 live births.

Source

Notes

Data Presentation: Born in Bradford Data

Born in Bradford Data Dictionary

Born in Bradford has a number of unique strengths: a) Composition. Half of all the families recruited are living in the UK’s most deprived wards, and 45% are of Pakistani origin. Half of Pakistani-origin mothers and fathers were born outside the UK and over half are related to their partner. This combination enhances the opportunity to study the interplay of deprivation, ethnicity, migration and cultural characteristics and their relationship to social, economic and health outcomes research relevant to many communities across the world.

b) Rich characterization. Detailed information has been collected from parents about demographic, economic, lifestyle, cultural, medical and health factors. Pregnancy oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTT), have been completed in 85% of the cohort and in combination with repeat fetal ultrasound data and subsequent follow-up growth and adiposity (repeat skinfolds, weight and height from birth to current age) will enable BiB uniquely to explore ethnic differences in body composition trajectories through infancy and childhood.

c) Genetic and biomarker data. Maternal, neonatal and follow-up child blood samples have provided biomarker measures of adiposity and immunity, together with stored samples, for which funding has been secured, to assess targeted NMR metabolites in maternal pregnancy fasting samples, cord-blood and infant samples taken at 12-24 months. Genome wide data is available for 9000+ mothers and 8000+ children and funding has been secured for DNA methylation of 1000 mother-child pairs. Our BiB biobank contains 200,000 stored samples.

d) System-wide coverage. The study has successfully linked primary and secondary care, radiology, laboratory and local authority data. This successful data linkage to routine health and education data will allow life-time follow up of clinical outcomes for BiB children and their parents, and educational attainment for children.

e) Community involvement. Close links with members of the public and particularly with cohort members allow the co-production of research in terms of the identification of research questions, monitoring the demands research makes on participants and discussion of the implementation of findings. The study has strong community roots and city-wide support.

Full details of the cohort and related publications can be found on the website

Patient characteristics Children born in the city of Bradford Claims years: 2007-2011 12,453 women with 13,776 pregnancies and 3,448 of their partners Cord blood samples have been obtained and stored and DNA extraction on 10,000 mother\offspring pairs. Sex: Adults: 12,453 women, 3,448 males

Application

If you are interested in working with these data, the application packet, with examples, can be found here: Born in Bradford Application Packet

The English Indices of Deprivation 2010 provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2010 Indices are for the year 2008. The domains used in the Indices of Deprivation 2010 are: income deprivation; employment deprivation; health deprivation and disability; education deprivation; crime deprivation; barriers to housing and services deprivation; and living environment deprivation. Each of these domains has its own scores and ranks, allowing users to focus on specific aspects of deprivation. In addition, two supplementary indices measure income deprivation amongst children - the Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI) - and older people - the Income Deprivation Affecting Older People Index (IDAOPI).This data was then combined with the LSOA boundaries in ArcGIS. The first data column is the Index of Multiple Deprivation Score. The second data column is the Rank of the Index of Multiple Deprivation Score. The LSOA with a rank of 1 is the most deprived, and 32482 the least deprived, on this overall measure. The IMD 2010 was constructed by combining the seven transformed domain scores, using the following weights: * Income (22.5%) * Employment (22.5%) * Health and Disability (13.5%) * Education, Skills and Training (13.5%) * Barriers to Housing and Services (9.3%) * Crime (9.3%) * Living Environment (9.3%) The the seven domain indices are each presented in separate tables available from the DCLG website. Data sourced from Data.gov.uk: http://data.gov.uk/dataset/index-of-multiple-deprivation and LSOA data from ONS Geoportal: https://geoportal.statistics.gov.uk/geoportal/catalog/main/home.page (the dataset date in this case refers to the date the data was uploaded). GIS vector data. This dataset was first accessioned in the EDINA ShareGeo Open repository on 2013-12-06 and migrated to Edinburgh DataShare on 2017-02-22.

This dataset contains a range of measures which form the Indices of Deprivation 2015 at LSOA level. The boundaries used have been generalised by 50 metres (point remove) for web display. This dataset has been curated mainly for education/teaching purposes. The Index of Multiple Deprivation ranks every small area in England from 1 (most deprived area) to 32,844 (least deprived area). It is common to describe how relatively deprived a small area is by saying whether it falls among the most deprived 10 per cent, 20 per cent or 30 per cent of small areas in England (although there is no definitive cut-off at which an area is described as ‘deprived’). To help with this, deprivation ‘deciles’ are published alongside ranks. This dataset has been published to show the show the IMD Ranks and Deciles for each LSOA for Education purposes. The Indices of Deprivation 2015 provide a set of relative measures of deprivation for small areas (Lower-layer Super Output Areas*) across England, based on seven domains of deprivation. The domains were combined using the following weights to produce the overall Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD):Income Deprivation (22.5%) Employment Deprivation (22.5%) Education, Skills and Training Deprivation (13.5%) Health Deprivation and Disability (13.5%) Crime (9.3%) Barriers to Housing and Services (9.3%) Living Environment Deprivation (9.3%). Please refer to this web page from Department for Communities and Local Government for more information on the dataset.

This dataset provides Census 2021 estimates that classify usual residents in England and Wales by long-term health problems or disabilities, sex, age and level of deprivation. The estimates are as at Census Day, 21 March 2021. Age-standardisation allows for comparisons between populations that may contain proportions of different ages.

The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) identifies areas of deprivation in each local authority area, and also for smaller areas within each local authority area known as Lower Layer Super Output Areas (LSOAs). These are similar to Middlesbrough's electoral wards.The 2015 IMD was published by the Department of Communities and Local Government.The IMD is a relative measure of deprivation and is based on a variety of indicators which have been combined into the categories listed below. The index is designed to give greater weight to certain categories which are considered to be a more significant factor in the experience of deprivation:Income Deprivation domain (weighting 22.5%); Employment Deprivation domain (22.5%);Health Deprivation and Disability domain (13.5%);Education, Skills and Training Deprivation domain (13.5%);Barriers to Housing and Services domain (9.3%);Crime domain (9.3%);Living Environment Deprivation domain (9.3%).Each of the 32,844 LSOAs in England are assigned a score based on deprivation levels and also a rank based on each of the scores. Rankings for the 326 English districts and boroughs are also calculated. Middlesbrough has a rank of average score of 6 (increased from 8 in 2010) meaning it is the 6th most deprived local authority area in England.Estimated ward ranksWhilst the IMD produces results for LSOAs, it is possible to estimate national ward ranks based on the LSOA scores. The table below shows the IMD overall rankings for Middlesbrough wards for 2015 and 2010 and also highlights rank change, with ranks being out of 7,522 (number of wards in England), where rank 1 is most deprived.Estimated ward ranks key.jpgOf the twenty Middlesbrough wards, six have improved their ranking and fourteen have got worse.Six wards (30%) are in the most deprived 1% in EnglandSeven (35%) in the most deprived 3%Ten wards (50%) are in the most deprived 10%At ward-level the biggest improvers amongst the most deprived areas are Central (from 23 in 2010 to 30 in 2015) and Ayresome (from 581 in 2010 to 681 in 2015).All six Middlesbrough wards in the top 1% most deprived wards nationally have increased their ranking (become more deprived), the most significant being North Ormesby which is now ranked the second most deprived ward nationally.You can compare IMD for each of the domains (income, employment, health and disability, education and skills, barriers to housing, crime and living environment) in each of the wards in Middlesbrough.

This dataset contains the main ranking for the Index of Multiple Deprivation, 2007. This dataset puts the 32,482 LSOAs into a rank order based on their 2007 IMD score. A rank of 1 is the most deprived.

The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2007 indices are for the year 2005.

The indices have been constructed by the Social Disadvantage Research Centre at the University of Oxford for the Department for Communities and Local Government. All figures can only be reproduced if the source (Department for Communities and Local Government, Indices of Deprivation 2007) is fully acknowledged.

The domains used in the Indices of Deprivation 2007 are: income deprivation; employment deprivation; health deprivation and disability; education deprivation; crime deprivation; barriers to housing and services deprivation; and living environment deprivation. Each of these domains has its own scores and ranks, allowing users to focus on specific aspects of deprivation.

Because the indices give a relative measure, they can tell you if one area is more deprived than another but not by how much. For example, if an area has a rank of 40 it is not half as deprived as a place with a rank of 20.

The Index of Multiple Deprivation was constructed by combining scores from the seven domains. When comparing areas, a higher deprivation score indicates a higher proportion of people living there who are classed as deprived. But as for ranks, deprivation scores can only tell you if one area is more deprived than another, but not by how much.

This dataset was created from a spreadsheet provided by the Department of Communities and Local Government, which can be downloaded here.

The method for calculating the IMD score and underlying indicators is detailed in the Guidance document.

The data is represented here as Linked Data, using the Data Cube ontology.

In 2023, the gross domestic product per capita in London was 63,618 British pounds, compared with 37,135 pounds per capita for the United Kingdom as a whole. Apart from London, the only other region of the UK that had a greater GDP per capita than the UK average was South East England, at 38,004 pounds per capita. By contrast, North East England had the lowest GDP per capita among UK regions, at 26,347 pounds. Regional imbalance in the UK economy? London's overall GDP in 2022 was over 508 billion British pounds, which accounted for almost a quarter of the overall GDP of the United Kingdom. South East England had the second-largest regional economy in the country, with a GDP of almost 341.7 billion British pounds. Furthermore, these two regions were the only ones that had higher levels of productivity (as measured by output per hour worked) than the UK average. While recent governments have recognized regional inequality as a major challenge facing the country, it may take several years for any initiatives to bear fruit. The creation of regional metro mayors across England is one of the earliest attempts at giving regions and cities in particular more power over spending in their regions than they currently have. UK economy growth slow in late 2024 After ending 2023 with two quarters of negative growth, the UK economy grew at the reasonable rate of 0.8 percent and 0.4 percent in the first and second quarters of the year. This was, however, followed by zero growth in the third quarter, and by just 0.1 percent in the last quarter of the year. Other economic indicators, such as the inflation rate, fell within the expected range in 2024, but have started to rise again, with a rate of three percent recorded in January 2025. While unemployment has witnessed a slight uptick since 2022, it is still at quite low levels compared with previous years.

This statistic presents the proportion of adults who volunteered in the last year in England in 2019/20, by their level of deprivation. The survey results showed a correlation between deprivation and participation in voluntary activities, as those from the most deprived neighborhoods in England tended to show a lower level of participation. Of respondents, 40 percent in the least deprived areas of England had volunteered at least once in the last 12 months compared to 18.3 percent of those in the most deprived areas.

This dataset contains a summary measure of the Index of Multiple Deprivation 2010 at local authority district level. It puts the 326 Local Authority Districts into a rank order based the population weighted average rank of all LSOAs in the LAD. A rank of 1 is the most deprived.

The English Indices of Deprivation provide a relative measure of deprivation at small area level across England. Areas are ranked from least deprived to most deprived on seven different dimensions of deprivation and an overall composite measure of multiple deprivation. Most of the data underlying the 2010 indices are for the year 2008.

The Indices are designed for small areas, but one way of summarising relative deprivation at local authority level is by calculating the average rank of the LSOAs within it.

For the IMD and each domain, the summary measure is calculated by averaging all of the LSOA ranks in each local authority district. For the purpose of calculation, LSOAs are ranked such that the most deprived LSOA is given the rank of 32,482. The LSOA ranks are population weighted within a local authority district to take account of the fact that LSOA size can vary. (For simplicity in summarising the domains, the same total population size is used for all domains.) Finally the LADs are ranked according to the average rank of the LSOAs, from 1 to 326 where 1 is the most deprived.

The ‘Rank of average rank’ summary measure of for local authorities is also published for the IMD at: http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/xls/1871689.xls.

This dataset provides detailed information on the 2019 Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) for Birmingham, UK. The data is available at the postcode level and includes the Lower Layer Super Output Area (LSOA) information.Data is provided at the LSOA 2011 Census geography.The decile score ranges from 1-10 with decile 1 representing the most deprived 10% of areas while decile 10 representing the least deprived 10% of areas.The IMD rank and decile score is allocated to the LSOA and all postcodes within it at the time of creation (2019).Note that some postcodes cross over LSOA boundaries. The Office for National Statistics sets boundaries for LSOAs and allocates every postcode to one LSOA only: this is the one which contains the majority of residents in that postcode area (as at 2011 Census).

The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) is a measure used in the UK to assess the relative deprivation of small areas, known as Lower-layer Super Output Areas (LSOAs). It combines information from seven different domains to provide an overall deprivation score for each area. These domains are:

Income Deprivation Employment Deprivation Education, Skills, and Training Deprivation Health Deprivation and Disability Crime Barriers to Housing and Services Living Environment Deprivation

Each domain is weighted and combined to create a single deprivation score, which is then used to rank all LSOAs in England from the most deprived to the least deprived.

The IMD is widely used by government and organizations to allocate resources, target interventions, and develop policies aimed at reducing deprivation and improving quality of life in the most deprived areas.

About the indices of deprivationThe English indices of deprivation measure relative deprivation in small areas in England. The index of multiple deprivation is the most widely used of these indices.The updated index of multiple deprivation (IMD) was published by the Department of Communities and Local Government (CLG) on 30 September 2015.The IMD brings together data covering seven different aspects or ‘domains’ of deprivation into a weighted overall index for each Lower-layer Super Output Area (LSOA) in England. The scores are then used to rank the LSOAs nationally and to calculate an IMD score for each local authority area. Local authorities are then ranked by their IMD score. The IMD presents a ranking of relative deprivation between and within local authorities in England. It is not a measure of affluence in an area, nor an absolute measure of how much more or less deprived an area is compared to another.The domains used in calculating the index are: Income; Employment; Education, Skills and Training; Health Deprivation and Disability; Crime; Barriers to Housing and Services; Living Environment. There are also two supplementary domains - Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI) and Income Deprivation Affecting Older People (IDAOPI).LSOAs are a geographical unit which has an average of 1,500 residents and 650 households. They were developed following the 2001 census, through the aggregation of smaller census output areas, to create areas with a reasonably compact shape and which were socially similar (assessed through housing type). Around one percent of LSOAs were changed following the 2011 Census in order to maintain the characteristics described above. There are now 32,844 LSOAs in England. Leicester now has 192 LSOAs.Leicester IMDLeicester is ranked 21st most deprived in IMD 2015 out of 326 local authorities, compared with 25th in the 2010 Index.Leicester is ranked within the 10% most deprived local authorities in EnglandCompared to England, Leicester has almost double the population living in the two fifths (40%) most deprived LSOA’s in the country. 76% of Leicester’s population, compared with only 40% of England’s, live in the 40% most deprived LSOAs in the country.A full report on deprivation in Leicester can be found on the Leicester City Council website here: https://www.leicester.gov.uk/your-council/policies-plans-and-strategies/health-and-social-care/data-reports-information/

The English Indices of Deprivation 2019 use 39 separate indicators, organised across seven distinct domains of deprivation which can be combined, using appropriate weights, to calculate the Index of Multiple Deprivation 2019 (IMD 2019). This is an overall measure of multiple deprivation experienced by people living in an area and is calculated for every Lower layer Super Output Area (LSOA) in England. The IMD 2019 can be used to rank every LSOA in England according to their relative level of deprivation.

Column

Full Column

LSOA01CD

LSOA code (2011)

LSOA01NM

LSOA name (2011)

LADcd

Local Authority District code (2019)

LADnm

Local Authority District name (2019)

IMDScore

Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) Score

IMDRank0

Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) Rank (where 1 is most deprived)

IMDDec0

Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)

IncScore

Income Score (rate)

IncRank

Income Rank (where 1 is most deprived)

IncDec

Income Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)

EmpScore

Employment Score (rate)

EmpRank

Employment Rank (where 1 is most deprived)

EmpDec

Employment Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)

EduScore

Education, Skills and Training Score

EduRank

Education, Skills and Training Rank (where 1 is most deprived)

EduDec

Education, Skills and Training Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)

HDDScore

Health Deprivation and Disability Score

HDDRank

Health Deprivation and Disability Rank (where 1 is most deprived)

HDDDec

Health Deprivation and Disability Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)

CriScore

Crime Score

CriRank

Crime Rank (where 1 is most deprived)

CriDec

Crime Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)

BHSScore

Barriers to Housing and Services Score

BHSRank

Barriers to Housing and Services Rank (where 1 is most deprived)

BHSDec

Barriers to Housing and Services Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)

EnvScore

Living Environment Score

EnvRank

Living Environment Rank (where 1 is most deprived)

EnvDec

Living Environment Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)

IDCScore

Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI) Score (rate)

IDCRank

Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI) Rank (where 1 is most deprived)

IDCDec

Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI) Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)

IDOScore

Income Deprivation Affecting Older People (IDAOPI) Score (rate)

IDORank

Income Deprivation Affecting Older People (IDAOPI) Rank (where 1 is most deprived)

IDODec

Income Deprivation Affecting Older People (IDAOPI) Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)

CYPScore

Children and Young People Sub-domain Score

CYPRank

Children and Young People Sub-domain Rank (where 1 is most deprived)

CYPDec

Children and Young People Sub-domain Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)

ASScore

Adult Skills Sub-domain Score

ASRank

Adult Skills Sub-domain Rank (where 1 is most deprived)

ASDec

Adult Skills Sub-domain Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)

GBScore

Geographical Barriers Sub-domain Score

GBRank

Geographical Barriers Sub-domain Rank (where 1 is most deprived)

GBDec

Geographical Barriers Sub-domain Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)

WBScore

Wider Barriers Sub-domain Score

WBRank

Wider Barriers Sub-domain Rank (where 1 is most deprived)

WBDec

Wider Barriers Sub-domain Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)

IndScore

Indoors Sub-domain Score

IndRank

Indoors Sub-domain Rank (where 1 is most deprived)

IndDec

Indoors Sub-domain Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)

OutScore

Outdoors Sub-domain Score

OutRank

Outdoors Sub-domain Rank (where 1 is most deprived)

OutDec

Outdoors Sub-domain Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)

TotPop

Total population: mid 2015 (excluding prisoners)

DepChi

Dependent Children aged 0-15: mid 2015 (excluding prisoners)

Pop16_59

Population aged 16-59: mid 2015 (excluding prisoners)

Pop60+

Older population aged 60 and over: mid 2015 (excluding prisoners)

WorkPop

Working age population 18-59/64: for use with Employment Deprivation Domain (excluding prisoners)

The English Indices of Deprivation 2019 use 39 separate indicators, organised across seven distinct domains of deprivation which can be combined, using appropriate weights, to calculate the Index of Multiple Deprivation 2019 (IMD 2019).The English Indices of Deprivation 2019 use 39 separate indicators, organised across seven distinct domains of deprivation which can be combined, using appropriate weights, to calculate the Index of Multiple Deprivation 2019 (IMD 2019). This is an overall measure of multiple deprivation experienced by people living in an area and is calculated for every Lower layer Super Output Area (LSOA) in England. The IMD 2019 can be used to rank every LSOA in England according to their relative level of deprivation.ColumnFull ColumnLSOA01CDLSOA code (2011)LSOA01NMLSOA name (2011)LADcdLocal Authority District code (2019)LADnmLocal Authority District name (2019)IMDScoreIndex of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) ScoreIMDRank0Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) Rank (where 1 is most deprived)IMDDec0Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)IncScoreIncome Score (rate)IncRankIncome Rank (where 1 is most deprived)IncDecIncome Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)EmpScoreEmployment Score (rate)EmpRankEmployment Rank (where 1 is most deprived)EmpDecEmployment Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)EduScoreEducation, Skills and Training ScoreEduRankEducation, Skills and Training Rank (where 1 is most deprived)EduDecEducation, Skills and Training Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)HDDScoreHealth Deprivation and Disability ScoreHDDRankHealth Deprivation and Disability Rank (where 1 is most deprived)HDDDecHealth Deprivation and Disability Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)CriScoreCrime ScoreCriRankCrime Rank (where 1 is most deprived)CriDecCrime Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)BHSScoreBarriers to Housing and Services ScoreBHSRankBarriers to Housing and Services Rank (where 1 is most deprived)BHSDecBarriers to Housing and Services Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)EnvScoreLiving Environment ScoreEnvRankLiving Environment Rank (where 1 is most deprived)EnvDecLiving Environment Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)IDCScoreIncome Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI) Score (rate)IDCRankIncome Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI) Rank (where 1 is most deprived)IDCDecIncome Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI) Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)IDOScoreIncome Deprivation Affecting Older People (IDAOPI) Score (rate)IDORankIncome Deprivation Affecting Older People (IDAOPI) Rank (where 1 is most deprived)IDODecIncome Deprivation Affecting Older People (IDAOPI) Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)CYPScoreChildren and Young People Sub-domain ScoreCYPRankChildren and Young People Sub-domain Rank (where 1 is most deprived)CYPDecChildren and Young People Sub-domain Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)ASScoreAdult Skills Sub-domain ScoreASRankAdult Skills Sub-domain Rank (where 1 is most deprived)ASDecAdult Skills Sub-domain Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)GBScoreGeographical Barriers Sub-domain ScoreGBRankGeographical Barriers Sub-domain Rank (where 1 is most deprived)GBDecGeographical Barriers Sub-domain Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)WBScoreWider Barriers Sub-domain ScoreWBRankWider Barriers Sub-domain Rank (where 1 is most deprived)WBDecWider Barriers Sub-domain Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)IndScoreIndoors Sub-domain ScoreIndRankIndoors Sub-domain Rank (where 1 is most deprived)IndDecIndoors Sub-domain Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)OutScoreOutdoors Sub-domain ScoreOutRankOutdoors Sub-domain Rank (where 1 is most deprived)OutDecOutdoors Sub-domain Decile (where 1 is most deprived 10% of LSOAs)TotPopTotal population: mid 2015 (excluding prisoners)DepChiDependent Children aged 0-15: mid 2015 (excluding prisoners)Pop16_59Population aged 16-59: mid 2015 (excluding prisoners)Pop60+Older population aged 60 and over: mid 2015 (excluding prisoners)WorkPopWorking age population 18-59/64: for use with Employment Deprivation Domain (excluding prisoners)

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.

The Great Britain Historical Database has been assembled as part of the ongoing Great Britain Historical GIS Project. The project aims to trace the emergence of the north-south divide in Britain and to provide a synoptic view of the human geography of Britain at sub-county scales. Further information about the project is available on A Vision of Britain webpages, where users can browse the database's documentation system online.

The Great Britain Historical GIS Project has also produced digitised boundary data, which can be obtained from the UK Data Service Census Support service. Further information is available at census.ukdataservice.ac.uk

Main Topics:

The Great Britain Historical Database is a large database of British nineteenth and twentieth-century statistics. Where practical the referencing of spatial units has been integrated, data for different dates have been assembled into single tables.

The Great Britain Historical Database currently contains :

• Statistics from the 1861 Census and the Registrar General's reports, 1851-1861
  
• Employment statistics from the census, 1841-1931
  
• Demographic statistics from the census, 1841-1931
  
• Mortality statistics from the Registrar General's reports, 1861-1920
  
• Marriage statistics from the Registrar General's reports, 1841-1870
  
• Trade union statistics for the Amalgamated Society of Engineers (ASE), 1851-1918
  
• Trade union statistics for the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners (ASCJ), 1863-1912
  
• Official poor law statistics, 1859-1915 and 1919-1939
  
• Wage statistics, 1845-1906
  
• Hours of work statistics, 1900-1913
  
• Small debt statistics from county courts, 1847-1913 and 1938
  

There are eight tables in this part of the Great Britain Historical Database :

Plaw_c holds county-level data for England and Wales on numbers of paupers taken from the Annual Reports of the Poor Law Board and later the Local Government Board for 1st January and 1st July from January 1859 to January 1915, plus January 1919.

Plaw_c_f holds a full transcript of county-level pauperage statistics for England and Wales taken from the Annual Reports of the Poor Law Board and later the Local Government Board for 1st January and 1st July 1860, 1863, 1866, 1868 and 1879.

Plaw_u holds data taken from the Returns to Parliament made by the Poor Law Board, and later the Local Government Board listing number of paupers in each poor law union on the 1st January and 1st July. Coverage is as follows: all poor law unions in Lancashire for 1st January and 1st July from 1860 to 1871; all poor law unions in England and Wales for 1st January only from 1900 to 1912; all unions in London, Lancashire, Durham and selected major urban unions for 1st January and 1st July in 1875, 1879 and 1880.

Plaw_u_f contains a full transcript of poor law union-level pauperage statistics for selected unions taken from the Returns to Parliament. Coverage is as follows: all poor law unions in Lancashire for 1st January and 1st July from 1860 to 1871; all unions in Suffolk, Norfolk, Cambridgeshire, Lincolnshire, Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire, Cheshire and the East and West Ridings of Yorkshire for 1st January and 1st July in 1860, 1863, 1866, 1868 and 1869.

Plaw_iw holds inter-war poor law statistics taken from the Returns to Parliament for 1st January only for all poor law unions in England and Wales from 1922 to 1930, and for all counties and county-boroughs in England and Wales from 1931 to 1939.

Plaw_20 holds poor law statistics for England and Wales for 1920 and 1921 for selected poor law union for 1st January only.

Plu_gaz converts names of poor law unions as they appear in plaw_u, plaw_u_f, plaw_iw and plaw_20 into the form used in the GIS.

Plu_gis holds names and counties of poor law unions as they appear in the GIS; used for checking names and constructing plu_gaz.

Please note: this study does not include information on named individuals and would therefore not be useful for personal family history research.