1. Child Poverty in Essex An update on the Essex Child Poverty Strategy 2015-2020
Version: 3.2
Date: 09/11/2018
Author: Chris Carpenter (Senior Strategy Advisor)
Contact: Chris Carpenter

2. Child Poverty in Essex
In 2015 Essex County Council worked with over 200 front line professionals from a range of locality, County and National partners to develop an understanding of the way in which poverty was impacting on Children and Families in Essex. Following a series of workshops across the County the Essex Child Poverty Strategy was launched and set out a shared ambition and commitment to addressing Child Poverty under the subtitle ‘Any is too many’.
The Strategy sets out to capture what life is like for families living in poverty in Essex and through development of the strategy with key stakeholders. It sets out a three phase model for supporting families that could be adopted by any practitioners or organisations, based on existing best practice. These stages were:
1. Working with the most vulnerable as a priority
Identifying the most vulnerable families wherever they are in Essex through intelligent use of data and effective, collaborative partnership working.
2. Building individual, family and community resilience
Supporting families to build positive relationships between individuals, peers and communities in order to create stability and resilience.
3. Reducing worklessness and low income
Improving access to training skills and meaningful, regular and well paid employment.
The Essex Strategy adopted a broader definition of poverty based on the lived experience of Essex families and established a basket of indicators developed around four key themes of Child Poverty; Health, Economic Growth, Housing and Education. The ‘Essex Child Poverty Indicators’ provide an overview of the conditions and influences that impact upon the lives of children and families in Essex with the opportunity to review the direction of travel across the four key areas.
This document looks to provide an update on the data across those indicators of poverty.

3. How we measure progress?
This slide shows the broad basket of indicators of child poverty and the direction of travel for each one (for Essex) since the launch of the strategy (green = we have improved; red = we have deteriorated / gone in opposite direction; blue = no change):
Health Indicators
Indicator
Direction Of Travel
UPDATE Nov 2018
Rates of teenage pregnancy (per 1000 population)
23.9 (2012)
16.7 (2017)
Economic Indicators
Percentage (%) of children in working households
53.4% (2012)
62.4% (2017)
Percentage (%) of children living in low income families
15.4% (2012)
13.8% (2017)
Percentage (%) of Disadvantaged pupils at end of KS4
21.6% (2014)
21% (2018)
Housing Indicators
Percentage (%) of households in fuel poverty
7.6 (2012)
8.6% (2017)
Families living in safe and suitable housing (per 1000 population)
2.2(2014)
The original indicator was disputed due to the definition of what is ‘safe and suitable’ housing.
Education Indicators
Percentage (% )of Children achieving a Good Level of Development at the end of the Reception Year. (Early Years Foundation Stage Profile)
61% (2014)
74% (2017)
Percentage(%) of children achieving level 4 at KS2, reading, writing, maths combined
79% (2013)
KS2 assessment changed 2016 so not possible to compare to previous years
Percentage (%) of young people achieving 5+ A-C at GCSE (inc Maths & English)
56.5% (2014)
GCSE assessment changed 2017 so not possible to compare to previous years
Percentage(%) of children attending a ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ school
74% (2013)
89.6% (Sept 2018)

4. Original data by District - Child Poverty
This table shows the basket of indicators set out in the Essex Child Poverty Strategy, broken down to district level. The data on this slide shows the district picture at the launch of the strategy.
% Children in working households (2014)1
% Children in low income families (2012)2
% households in fuel poverty (2012)3
% Children Good Level of Development (GLD) (2014)4
% of expected standard or above at KS2
(2014)5*
% of 5 A*-C at GCSE (inc Maths and English)
(2014)6
% of children Good or outstanding schools (2014)7
Rates of teenage pregnancy (per 1000) (2012)8
% of Disadvantaged pupils at end of KS4 (2014)9
Basildon
49.7
21.5
6.1 62 76
52.8
64.9
34.9
27.7
Braintree
50.7
13.6
8.1 57 78
47.4
71.1 23
21.9
Brentwood
78.0
10.2
7.7 64 86
63.5
88.1 12
12.4
Castle Point
41.0
15.8
6.6 59 82
52.2
87.2
20.8
21.1
Chelmsford
57.4
7.2 80
61.0
86.9
19.4
14.7
Colchester
58.3
15.5
8.3 79
55.0
68.2
27.5
Epping Forest
44.0
13.8
8.2 63
60.8
81.9
21.7
23.8
Harlow
50.3
19.7
6.4 60
58.6
80.4
37.1 29
Maldon
44.2
12.2
7.9 65 77
52.0
85.1
16.6
21.3
Rochford
59.7
9.7
6.5 81
63.8
68.4 15
15.4
Tendring
43.8
23.6
8.6 58 73
51.3
56.4
32.4
32.8
Uttlesford
71.6
7.5
9.4 66 87
63.9
83.3
9.8
13.7
Essex
53.4
7.6 61
56.5 74
23.9
21.6
England
52.7
18.6
10.4
78.4
26.9
data source:
Non-Working families – percentage of children in families where both parents are not in employment. Annual Population Survey household datasets 
2. Low Income - Number of children living in families in receipt of CTC whose reported income is less than 60 per cent of the median income or in receipt of IS or (Income-Based) JSA, divided by the total number of children in the area (determined by Child Benefit data)
3. Households in Fuel Poverty - low income high costs indicator. Under the LIHC indicator, a household is considered to be fuel poor if: they have required fuel costs that are above average. Were they to spend that amount, they would be left with a residual income below the official poverty line. (the national median level).
4. GLD results -
5. Key stage 2 results -
6. Key Stage 4 results (5 A*-C grades Inc Maths/Lit) Achievements at GCSE and equivalent for pupils at the end of key stage 4 by local authority district and region of school location -
7. % children in Good/Outstanding Schools -
8. Teenage Pregnancy rates - Conception statistics England and Wales of those 18 and under -
2015 data -
Key: (boxes) – Compared to Essex Average
Worse than National average
Worse than Essex average
Average
Better than Average

5. Current data/progress by District - Child Poverty
This table shows the basket of indicators set out in the Essex Child Poverty Strategy, broken down to district level. The data on this slide shows the current data across each indicator and compares progress across the districts.
% Children in working households (2017)1
% Children in low income families (2015)2
% households in fuel poverty (2016)3
% Children Good Level of Development (GLD) (2017)4
% of expected standard or above at KS2
(2018)5*
% of children at GCSE achieving a 4+ standard pass in English and Maths (2018)
% of children Good or outstanding schools (30th Sept 2018)7
Rates of teenage pregnancy (per 1000)
(2016)8
% of Disadvantaged pupils at end of KS4 (2018)9
Basildon
45.7 (-4)
18.2 (-3.3)
7.8 (+1.7)
71 (+9) 66 58
87.2 (+22.3)
23.4 (-11.5)
26.9 (-0.8)
Braintree
66.6 (+15.9)
11.7 (-1.9)
8.8 (+0.7)
74 (+17) 63
60.2
91.2 (+20.1)
14.8 (-8.2)
20 (-1.9)
Brentwood
55.9 (-22.1)
9.0 (-1.2)
8.1 (+0.4)
78 (+14) 72
77.2
94.6 (+5.8)
10.4 (-1.6)
15.1 (+2.7)
Castle Point
74.8 (+33.8)
14.1 (-1.7)
9.3 (+2.7)
73 (+14)
58.8
89.2 (+2)
21.4 (+0.6)
21.6 (+0.5)
Chelmsford
68.6 (+11.2)
10.6 (-1.4)
7.9 (+0.7)
75 (+11) 67
74.6
89.2(+2.3)
12.2 (-7.2)
14.8 (+0.1)
Colchester
67.1 (+8.8)
14.0 (-1.5)
9.5 (+1.2)
72 (+10)
68.2
94 (+25.8)
12.4 (-15.1)
21.8(+0.3)
Epping Forest
62.2 (+18.2)
12.0 (-1.8)
8.1 (-0.1)
73 (+10)
66.8
92.2 (+10.3)
16.6 (-5.1)
20.2 (-3.6)
Harlow
68.9 (+18.6)
16.6 (-3.1)
7.9 (+1.5)
72 (+12)
60.7
80.6 (+0.2)
27.6 (-9.5)
26.7 (-3.3)
Maldon
57.5 (+13.3)
11.1 (-1.1)
9.0 (+1.1)
75 (+10)
57.2
88.4 (+3.3)
12.0 (-4.6)
24.9 (+3.6)
Rochford
79.7 (+20)
9.6 (-0.1)
7.6 (+1.1)
77 (+13) 69
59.7
77.9 (+9.5)
16.0 (+1)
17.1 (+1.7)
Tendring
49.7 (+5.9)
23.0 (-0.6)
10.6 (+2)
70 (+12) 53
46.7
95.4 (+39)
23.5 (-8.9)
30.2 (-2.6)
Uttlesford
61.5 (-10.1)
6.6 (-0.9)
8.8 (+0.6)
77 (+11) 73
65.9
91.3 (+8)
7.6 (-2.2)
12.2 (-1.5)
Essex
62.4 (+9)
13.8 (-1.6)
8.6 (+1)
74 (+13) 65
64.8
89.6 (+15.6)
16.7 (-7.2)
21 (-0.6)
England
57.6 (+4.9)
16.6 (-2)
11.1 (+0.7)
71.5 (+11.5) 64
53.5
86.8 (+8.4)
18.8 (-8.9) #
# - National stat on disadvantaged pupils at KS4 not released until January.
data source:
% of Children in Working Households – A working household is a household that contains at least one person aged 16 to 64, where all individuals aged 16 and over are in employment.
2. Low Income - Number of children living in families in receipt of CTC whose reported income is less than 60 per cent of the median income or in receipt of IS or (Income-Based) JSA, divided by the total number of children in the area (determined by Child Benefit data)
3. Households in Fuel Poverty - low income high costs indicator. Under the LIHC indicator, a household is considered to be fuel poor if: they have required fuel costs that are above average. Were they to spend that amount, they would be left with a residual income below the official poverty line. (the national median level).
4. Early Years Results – Good Level of Development percentage -
5. Key stage 2 results (expected standard in Maths, Reading and Writing) - (Y)
6. Key Stage 4 results (5 A*-C grades Inc Maths/Lit) Achievements at GCSE and equivalent for pupils at the end of key stage 4 by local authority district and region of school location - (Y)
7. % children in Good/Outstanding Schools -
8. Teenage Pregnancy rates - Conception statistics England and Wales of those 18 and under -
2015 data -
9. DfE revised performance tables published 29th January 2015 and 16th October 2018
Key: (boxes) –
Compared to Essex Average
Worse than National average
Worse than Essex average
Average
Better than Average
Key: (numbers) –
Compared to previous stats
A worse score
Equal
Improved
*Please note KS2 & Ks4 assessments changed in recent years, so not possible to compare to previous years

6. Key headlines from the data
Negative
Positive
% of fuel poverty has increased across all areas of the county except Epping
Teenage Pregnancy rates have improved across all but 2 Districts
Tendring scored below national average on all but 2 indicators of poverty
% of children attending Good/Outstanding schools has increased everywhere. All districts are above the national average
Ks2 results lower than national average in 4 districts across Essex
GLD – Essex has improved significantly in this area with a 13% increase since 2014.
A dramatic drop in children in working households in Brentwood (22% decrease)
KS2 results are higher than national average in all but 1 district in Essex
Increase in disadvantaged children at Ks4 in Brentwood (2.7% increase)
% of children in Brentwood achieving a 4+ standard mark in Maths and Literacy at GCSE well above national/Essex averages (77%)
Around a 1/3 of children in Basildon, Harlow and Tendring are from disadvantaged backgrounds .
Tendring scored well below the national average at GCSE and Ks2, despite having the highest number of children attend good or outstanding schools
Essex scored better than national average on all indicators of child poverty

7. The 5 most/least improved Indicators
Most Improved
3.3% reduction in % of children in Basildon living in low income families
% of children in Working households in Brentwood (22.1% decrease)
3.6% decrease in disadvantaged pupils at Ks4 in Epping
Fuel Poverty in Castle Point (2.7% increase)
% of children attending good/outstanding schools in Tendring & Colchester (39% & 25.8% increase)
% of low income families in Tendring highest in Essex and improved less than national average
% of children in working housing holds increased by 33% in Castle Point
Teenage pregnancy rates in Rochford and Castle Point (1% increase / 0.6% increase)
Good Level of Development in Braintree (17% increase)
Disadvantaged pupils at Ks4 increased 3.6% in Maldon & 2.7% in Brentwood
Fuel Poverty Maldon (1.1% increase)
Teenage pregnancy in Basildon, Colchester & Harlow (around 10% on average)

8. Conclusions
Across all areas of child poverty, Essex seems to be doing better than national average. There have been some improvements in areas such as Basildon and Harlow particularly in regard to Education stats.
Tendring however has seen much slower improvement. Tendring generally improves at the same level as national scores and although has shown improvements across 5 indicators is lower than national average for 6 of them (it is also likely to be higher than national figures for disadvantage at Ks4)
Health Indicators
Generally teenage pregnancy rates have reduced across Essex but not as much as the national figure. Tendring, Castle Point, Harlow and Basildon are higher than the national figure, whilst other districts such as Rochford and Castle Point have seen an increase.
Economic Indicators
The % of Children in working households has increased by 9% in Essex, which is almost double the rate of improvement at national level. Basildon and Tendring are of biggest concern, however Brentwood has seen a big reduction in working households and an increase in disadvantaged children at Ks4.
The % of Children Living in Low Income Families in Essex has reduced but not quite as much as the national picture. Tendring has the highest percentage of Children in Low Income Families as well as being one of the least improved.
In 2012 Basildon was 2.9% higher than national average in terms of Children in Low Income Families and Harlow was 1.1% above the National average. Now, Harlow is equal with the national average whilst Basildon is still slightly above. However this does show a positive trend.
Housing Indicators
Fuel poverty is below the national average across Essex, however, all areas except Epping have seen increases in fuel poverty since the launch of the Strategy.
Education Indicators
GCSE’s scores in Essex are largely positive and are higher than national average, Tendring is the only district performing worse than the National average.
In contrast Tendring has the highest number of children attending a good or outstanding school, this could indicate that good or outstanding provisions do not guarantee high results.
At KS2 it is difficult to judge whether these have improved as the assessment has changed since the launch of the strategy. However, results were largely higher than national average with the exception of Braintree, Colchester, Epping and Tendring (which was the lowest). This is one area where Essex is not far above the national picture.
There have been vast improvements in the percentage of children attending a Good/Outstanding school with Essex as a whole improving by 15.6% since August This is a much greater improvement than the national picture and areas such as Tendring and Basildon have seen vast improvements.
Progress has been significant in Early Years with GLD up for the fourth consecutive year. GLD in Tendring is still below the National average.

9. What the data will be used for
1. Catalyst for Change – Identifying areas of poverty, rekindles the conversation around Child Poverty.
2. This is not just an Essex County Council Issue – All partners are responsible for dealing with this issue.
3. Conversations across people and place – e.g. only 1 in 8 children in the UK that live in poverty go on to gain a high paid job.
What Can we do?
1. Work with Partners – Poverty exists at a localised level, even district stats hide the true picture.
2. Trends and early intervention – From the data we can identify opportunities around early intervention based on trends.