% of Island population % of Island population Ward profile information packs: The information within this pack is designed to offer key data and information about this ward in a variety of subjects. It is one in a series of 39 packs produced by the Council Business Intelligence Unit which cover all electoral wards. (2011 Census) 3,612 138,392 % of the Island total 2.61% 1 8% 6% 4% 2% 1 8% 6% 4% 2% Males Females Age Males Females 0-4 78 76 5-9 77 66 10-14 79 90 15-19 101 109 20-24 115 137 25-29 153 121 30-24 114 113 35-39 110 100 40-44 157 145 45-49 145 150 50-54 142 113 55-59 119 109 60-64 124 114 65-69 112 89 70-74 67 71 75-79 41 84 80-84 23 62 85+ 24 82 Total 1,781 1,831 Change The table below shows the population figures for, Cluster and the as a whole and how their populations have changed since 2002 (using ONS mid-year estimates). Cluster Pop. % Pop. % Pop. % 2002 3,529 34,345 134,038 2003 3,467-1.76 34,528 +0.53 135,073 +0.77 2004 3,538 +2.05 34,782 +0.74 136,409 +0.99 2005 3,541 +0.08 35,051 +0.77 137,827 +1.04 2006 3,464-2.17 35,115 +0.18 138,536 +0.51 2007 3,451-0.38 35,398 +0.81 139,443 +0.65 2008 3,433-0.52 35,508 +0.31 140,158 +0.51 2009 3,400-0.96 35,504-0.01 140,229 +0.05 2010 3,395-0.15 35,728 +0.63 140,491 +0.19 Source: ONS Mid-Year Estimates In total between 2002 and 2010, the population of had decreased by 3.8%, Cluster has increased by 4.03% and the had increased by 4.81%. Page 1 of 5 Produced by Council Business Intelligence Unit, March 2013
Ward profile information packs: Deprivation The 2010 Indices of Deprivation were published by the Department for Communities and Local Government (CLG) in March 2010. For the purposes of constructing these Indices, deprivation was not limited to just a lack of financial resource, but took account of a range of different issues, where the main consideration was a lack of fulfilment to people s needs in respect of their lives. How were the results arrived at? Outcomes were based mainly on 2008 data, using a combination of 38 separate indicators to provide a ranking, or comparison, of deprivation for each of the areas across England which were included. Using a number of different indicators, these were aggregated across seven distinct domains, each of which represents a specific form of deprivation: Barriers to Housing and other Services Crime Living Environment Income Employment Health and Disability Education, Skills and Training The Indices of Deprivation measure and rank the relative levels of deprivation based on small geographical areas called Lower layer Super Output Areas (LSOAs) whose sizes vary but are generally smaller than Electoral Wards and have an average population of around 1,500 residents. This approach can be used to rank every small area in England according to the deprivation experienced by the people living there (a total of 32,482 LSOAs). The map below shows the LSOAs within Cluster and their levels of deprivation compared with England. Source: The English Indices of Deprivation 2010 - Communities and Local Government (c) Crown copyright and database rights 2012 Ordnance Survey 100019229 Key to IMD National Ranking Among 2 most deprived areas of England Among 21-4 most deprived areas of England Broadly in line with the England average Among 21-4 least deprived areas of England Among 2 least deprived areas of England Page 2 of 5 Produced by Council Business Intelligence Unit, March 2013
Ward profile information packs: Mosaic Data Mosaic Public Sector data provides socio-demographic segmentation of all UK households, based on over 440 data elements, including Census data. All UK citizens are classified into 69 types and 15 groups, helping local authorities gain a better understanding of the characteristics and needs of the local population. This table looks at the 15 groups and the make-up of households within them. Cluster England Number % Number % Number % % A Residents of isolated rural communities 17 0.9 1,426 7.8 6,281 9.3 4.5 B Residents of small and mid-sized towns with strong local roots 552 27.6 3,621 19.9 16,433 24.2 8.7 C Wealthy people living in the most sought after neighbourhoods 2 0.1 51 0.3 103 0.2 3.1 D Successful professionals living in suburban or semi-rural homes 9 0.5 987 5.4 2,973 4.4 8.2 E Middle income families living in moderate suburban semis 32 1.6 773 4.2 2,608 3.8 10.9 F Couples with young children in comfortable modern housing 2 0.1 161 0.9 515 0.8 5.6 G Young, well-educated city dwellers 303 15.2 1,072 5.9 1,607 2.4 9.1 H Couples and young singles in small modern starter homes 153 7.7 798 4.4 2,739 4.0 5.0 I Lower income workers in urban terraces in often diverse areas 53 2.7 463 2.5 2,052 3.0 7.3 J Owner occupiers in older-style housing in ex-industrial areas 94 4.7 1,519 8.3 6,036 8.9 7.8 K Residents with sufficient incomes in right-to-buy social housing 137 6.9 1,182 6.5 5,102 7.5 9.2 L Active elderly people living in pleasant retirement locations 297 14.9 4,008 22.0 14,158 20.9 4.3 M Elderly people reliant on state support 231 11.6 1,149 6.3 4,418 6.5 5.5 N Young people renting flats in high density social housing 109 5.5 576 3.2 1,259 1.9 5.5 O Families in low-rise social housing with high levels of benefit need 9 0.5 413 2.3 1,566 2.3 5.5 Total 2,000 18,199 67,850 Source: Experian 2012 Mosaic Public Sector Group B contains residents who mostly live in medium sized and smaller towns in neighbourhoods of older housing where there is relatively little turnover from year to year. Though some people are quite well off and others have to be careful to make ends meet, this is not a group where you are likely to find people at either extreme of the income distribution. A significant number are self-employed. The best off are likely to be the owners of successful local businesses, the least well off recent school-leavers who rent small flats over shops in the centre of town. This Group has very few members of minority ethnic groups. Group G contains a high proportion of the country's workforce in sectors which involve communications, such as journalism, politics, entertainment and the arts, fashion and design, university education and the internet. Most residents benefit from a university education, more often than not from a degree in the arts or humanities. Interested in exploring the worlds of people different from themselves, people tend to be engaged in the type of occupations where there is no clear boundary between work and leisure. A common characteristic of this Group is the late age at which people establish permanent partnerships. They stay single longer than in other Groups. Likewise, the average age when women bear children is much greater than the national average. This results in a very high population of young, childless, single people. Page 3 of 5 Produced by Council Business Intelligence Unit, March 2013
Ward profile information packs: Ethnicity The following table shows the ethnicity of each ward in Cluster: Haylands No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % All people 3,185 6,935 3,613 2,549 3,651 3,612 3,342 4,450 3,637 White: 3,048 95.7 6,648 95.9 3,477 96.2 2,407 94.4 3,477 95.2 3,321 91.9 3,072 91.9 4,110 92.4 3,470 95.4 White: Non- 60 1.9 175 2.5 61 1.7 76 3.0 76 2.1 154 4.3 128 3.8 111 2.5 75 2.1 Mixed Race 30 0.9 59 0.9 37 1.0 26 1.0 69 1.9 62 1.7 59 1.8 149 3.3 50 1.4 Asian or Asian 29 0.9 46 0.7 28 0.8 33 1.3 23 0.6 61 1.7 72 2.2 70 1.6 34 0.9 Black or Black 9 0.3 5 0.1 9 0.2 6 0.2 4 0.1 10 0.3 8 0.2 7 0.2 5 0.1 Chinese or other ethnic 9 0.3 2 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 2 0.1 4 0.1 3 0.1 3 0.1 3 0.1 group Source: ONS 2011 Census 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Brading, St Haylands Comparison of proportions for residents - White and other groups Cluster Wight Cluster The Bay Cluster Wight Cluster Cluster Newport Cluster Cowes Cluster Other Groups White 2 4 6 8 10 The table above shows has the joint lowest rate for Other Groups White a White resident population in the Cluster while having The graph above shows Cluster has a White majority the highest rate for residents from a White Non- background that is broadly similar to the Island s. The graph also shows the and joint highest rate for those from a Black or Black Island has overall a higher proportion of White population background. than the and England average. Page 4 of 5 Produced by Council Business Intelligence Unit, March 2013 England
Ward profile information packs: Religion This table and graph show the religious belief of Cluster wards: Haylands No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % All people 3,185 6,935 3,613 2,549 3,651 3,612 3,342 4,450 3,637 Christian 2,169 68.1 4,605 66.4 2,233 61.81 1,834 71.95 2,201 60.28 1,875 51.91 1,903 56.94 2,187 49.15 2,087 57.38 Buddhist 4 0.13 16 0.23 8 0.22 15 0.59 4 0.11 22 0.61 13 0.39 14 0.31 11 0.3 Hindu 10 0.31 10 0.14 5 0.14 8 0.31 2 0.05 0 0 4 0.12 90 2.02 0 0 Jewish 1 0.03 10 0.14 1 0.03 5 0.2 3 0.08 7 0.19 5 0.15 4 0.09 0 0 Muslim 8 0.25 12 0.17 13 0.36 6 0.24 5 0.14 8 0.22 15 0.45 20 0.45 18 0.49 Sikh 1 0.03 1 0.01 0 0 0 0 3 0.08 2 0.06 0 0 5 0.11 2 0.05 Any other religion 23 0.72 33 0.48 30 0.83 11 0.43 22 0.6 38 1.05 24 0.72 36 0.81 14 0.39 No religion 711 22.32 1,648 23.76 1,079 29.86 474 18.6 1,158 31.72 1,333 36.91 1,076 32.2 1,765 39.66 1,201 33.02 Religion not stated 258 8.1 600 8.65 244 6.75 196 7.69 253 6.93 327 9.05 302 9.04 329 7.39 304 8.36 Source: ONS 2011 Census Comparison of rates for different religious beliefs 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Haylands & Seaview has the second lowest rate for those a Christian faith in the Cluster together with the highest rate for those of the Buddhist faith and for those who had not declared their religious beliefs. The Island (1.06%) as a whole has a lower proportion of people of other religious beliefs (e.g. Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh) than the (4.76%) or England (8.27%). The Island (29.62%) also has a higher proportion of people with no religion compared with the (27.66%) and England averages (24.74%). Page 5 of 5 Produced by Council Business Intelligence Unit, March 2013 Christian All other main religions Any other religion No religion Religion not stated Cluster Isle of Wight England