Roadmap to Disability Equality

From the Office for Disability Issues.

(click on link above for version with graphs)

 

Disability equality indicators

The Disability Equality Indicators are a starting point in measuring progress towards disability equality. They cover a number of themes that disabled people have told us are important to them. These indicators are used to help monitor progress on the Independent Living Strategy, the Roadmap and the UN Convention.

We work with partners across Government to ensure there is transparency in how we compare the life chances of disabled people to non-disabled people. Further indicators will be published as data becomes available.

 

A1 – Use of childcare

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2004. Figures from 2008 show that children with disabled parents/guardians were significantly less likely to use childcare than children in families with no disabled parents/guardians. The gap between families with disabled children and families with no disabled parents/guardians was not significant. In 2008, 51% of families with children with at least one disabled parent used childcare compared to 57% of families with children with no disabled parents/guardians. In the same period, 56% of families with disabled children took up childcare. These figures have not significantly changed since the baseline.

2004 2007 2008
Disabled children (%) 53% 54% 56%
Children with disabled parent (%) 48% 46% 51%
Children in families with no disabled parents/guardians (%) 57% 57% 57%
  1. Disabled children (%)
  2. Children with disabled parent (%)
  3. Children in families with no disabled parents/guardians (%)

Definition: Data on children with disabled parents is taken from questions on whether the respondent to the survey, and/or the respondent’s partner (if they have one) are disabled. The data covers use of any childcare, both formal and informal in the past week. Data covers England.

Note: The group formerly referred to as “families where no-one is disabled” is now is now referred to as “families with no disabled parents/guardians”.

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): This indicator is also used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy, for which the baseline is 2007.

Data Source: Childcare and Early Years Survey of Parents

Published: 16 October 2009

A2 – Unauthorised absence from school

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2006/07. Figures from 2008/09 show that students with Special Educational Needs (SEN), both with and without a statement, missed 2.0% of half days of schooling compared to 0.8% half days of schooling missed by students without SEN.

2006/07 2007/08 2008/09
SEN (%) 1.9% 1.9% 2.0%
No SEN (%) 0.8% 0.8% 0.8%
  1. SEN (%)
  2. No SEN (%)

Unauthorised absence (% of half days missed)

Definition: The absence rate is the number of sessions missed due to unauthorised absence as a proportion of total sessions of schooling. The assessment of child’s Special Educational Needs by local authorities determines whether the local authority issues a statement of the child’s needs or not. Data is not currently collected by disability, SEN provides a limited proxy (there are both disabled children who do not have SEN and non disabled children who do have SEN). Data collected prior to 2006/07 is not comparable due definitional changes. Data covers England.

Data Source: School Census Data

Published: 23 August 2010

A3 – Achievement at Key Stage 2

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005. Between 2005 and 2009, the percentage of students achieving at least Level 4 at Key Stage 2 in English has

  • increased from 91% to 92% for students without SEN
  • increased from 41% to 47% for students with SEN without a statement
  • increased from 16% to 17% for students with SEN with a statement

During the same period, the percentage of students achieving at least Level 4 at Key Stage 2 in Maths has

  • increased from 86% to 90% for students without SEN
  • increased from 41% to 50% for students with SEN without a statement
  • increased from 18% to 21% for students with SEN with a statement

During the same period, the percentage of students achieving at least Level 4 at Key Stage 2 in Science has

  • increased from 94% to 95% for students without SEN
  • increased from 66% to 72% for students with SEN without a statement
  • increased from 32% to 34% for students with SEN with a statement

A3 – Achievement at Key Stage 2 (English)

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
No SEN (%) 88% 87% 89% 91% 91% 92% 93% 92%
SEN with statement (%) 13% 13% 15% 16% 17% 19% 19% 17%
SEN without statement (%) 37% 34% 38% 41% 42% 46% 49% 47%
  1. No SEN (%)
  2. SEN with statement (%)
  3. SEN without statement (%)

A3 – Achievement at Key Stage 2 (Maths)

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
No SEN (%) 87% 83% 85% 86% 87% 88% 89% 90%
SEN with statement (%) 15% 14% 17% 18% 19% 20% 21% 21%
SEN without statement (%) 41% 37% 38% 41% 43% 46% 49% 50%
  1. No SEN (%)
  2. SEN with statement (%)
  3. SEN without statement (%)

A3 – Achievement at Key Stage 2 (Science)

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
No SEN (%) 94% 94% 93% 94% 94% 95% 95% 95%
SEN with statement (%) 34% 33% 32% 32% 33% 34% 34% 34%
SEN without statement (%) 69% 66% 64% 66% 67% 69% 71% 72%
  1. No SEN (%)
  2. SEN with statement (%)
  3. SEN without statement (%)

Definition: Expected level of achievement at Key Stage 2 is level 4. Key Stage 2 is the legal term for the four years of schooling in England and Wales in maintained schools normally known as Year 3, Year 4, Year 5 and Year 6. Attainment in National Curriculum tests at the end of the Key Stage (Year 6) is the data presented here. The assessment of child’s Special Educational Needs by local authorities determines whether the local authority issues a statement of the child’s needs or not. Data is not currently collected by disability, SEN provides a limited proxy (there are both disabled children who do not have SEN and non disabled children who do have SEN). Data covers England.

Data Source: National Pupil Database which matches School Census and Attainment data

Published: 23 August 2010

A4 – Achievement at Key Stage 3

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005. Between 2005 and 2007, the percentage of students achieving at least Level 5 at Key Stage 3 in English has

  • decreased from 84% to 83% for students without SEN
  • increased from 12% to 14% for students with SEN with a statement
  • increased from 36% to 38% for students with SEN without a statement

During the same period, the percentage of students achieving at least Level 5 at Key Stage 3 in Maths has

  • increased from 83% to 86% for students without SEN
  • increased from 15% to 18% for students with SEN with a statement
  • increased from 38% to 43% for students with SEN without a statement

During the same period, the percentage of students achieving at least Level 5 at Key Stage 3 in Science has

  • increased from 79% to 83% for students without SEN
  • increased from 17% to 20% for students with SEN with a statement
  • increased from 33% to 40% for students with SEN without a statement

A4 – Achievement at Key Stage 3 (English)

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
No SEN 78% 79% 81% 84% 83% 83%
SEN with statement 10% 10% 11% 12% 12% 14%
SEN without statement 28% 27% 30% 36% 34% 38%
  1. No SEN
  2. SEN with statement
  3. SEN without statement

A4 – Achievement at Key Stage 3 (Maths)

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
No SEN (%) 78% 80% 83% 83% 87% 86%
SEN with statement (%) 14% 13% 15% 15% 18% 18%
SEN without statement (%) 31% 32% 35% 38% 43% 43%
  1. No SEN (%)
  2. SEN with statement (%)
  3. SEN without statement (%)

A4 – Achievement at Key Stage 3 (Science)

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
No SEN (%) 77% 78% 76% 79% 82% 83%
SEN with statement (%) 19% 16% 14% 17% 18% 20%
SEN without statement (%) 33% 31% 27% 33% 37% 40%
  1. No SEN (%)
  2. SEN with statement (%)
  3. SEN without statement (%)

Definition: Expected level of achievement at Key Stage 3 is level 5. Key Stage 3 is the legal term for the three years of schooling in England and Wales in maintained schools normally known as Year 7, Year 8, and Year 9. Attainment in National Curriculum tests at the end of the Key Stage (Year 9) is the data presented here. Data covers England. The assessment of child’s Special Educational Needs by local authorities determines whether the local authority issues a statement of the child’s needs or not. Data is not currently collected by disability, SEN provides a limited proxy (there are both disabled children who do not have SEN and non disabled children who do have SEN).

Data Source: Figures combine School Census Data and Attainment Data

Published: 02 June 2009

A5 – Pupils at the end of Key Stage 4 achieving 5 or more GCSEs at grades A*-C

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005/06. Between 2005/06 and 2008/09, the percentage of pupils at the end of Key Stage 4 achieving 5 or more GCSEs at grades A*-C has:

  • increased from 66.3 per cent to 80.2 per cent for students without Special Educational Needs (SEN);
  • increased from 19.8 per cent to 40.3 per cent for students with SEN without a statement;
  • iincreased from 8.7 per cent to 14.9 per cent for students with SEN with a statement.

Statistical significance tests were not available at time of publication.

2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09
No SEN (%) 66.3% 69.4% 74.6% 80.2%
SEN without statement (%) 19.8% 23.7% 30.5% 40.3%
SEN with statement (%) 8.7% 9.4% 11.2% 14.9%
  1. No SEN (%)
  2. SEN without statement (%)
  3. SEN with statement (%)

Definition: Data covers maintained schools only, including academies and City Technology Colleges and excluding independent schools, pupil referral units, independent special schools, and non-maintained special schools and, for Post-16, any pupils in sixth forms centres and further education sector colleges. The assessment of child’s Special Educational Needs by local authorities determines whether the local authority issues a statement of the child’s needs or not. Data is not currently collected by disability, SEN provides a limited proxy (there are both disabled children who do not have SEN and non disabled children who do have SEN). Data covers England. Figures are based on final estimates with the exception of 2008/09 data, which reflects revised results. SEN provision information is taken from the January of the examination year.

Note: Previously published data has been revised in accordance with revisions to final estimates.

Data Source: National Pupil Database

Published: 01 June 2010

A6 – 16 year olds studying for Level 3 qualifications

Baseline and Trends: The chart below shows data from 2003/04. This states 39% of disabled 16 year olds were studying level 3 qualifications in comparison to 50% of non disabled 16 year olds. This is a significant gap.

2003/04
Disabled 39%
Non disabled 50%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

Definition: Level 3 qualifications equate to 2 A-level passes or their equivalent. YCS respondents report whether or not they are disabled; they are not asked about the type of disability. There is considerable volatility over time in the reporting of disability and the sample sizes tend to be small. Any analysis of the disabled group is subject to fairly wide confidence intervals. The YCS gives us some understanding of the differences between the disabled and non disabled group within a cohort. There are limits to using data from successive cohorts to reliably infer trends in these differences.

Note: Updated figures were not available at the time of publication.

Data Source: Youth Cohort Study (YCS) Cohort 12, Sweep 1 (16 year olds in England and Wales 2003/04)

Published: 01 December 2008

A7 – Young people who attain Level 3 qualifications by age 18

Baseline and Trends: The chart below shows data from 2005/06, which will provide the baseline. This states 38% of disabled 18 year olds achieved level 3 qualifications in comparison to 46% of non disabled 18 year olds. This is a significant gap.

2005/06
Disabled 38%
Non disabled 46%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

Definition: YCS respondents report whether or not they are disabled; they are not asked about the type of disability. There is considerable volatility over time in the reporting of disability and the sample sizes tend to be small. Any analysis of the disabled group is subject to fairly wide confidence intervals. The YCS gives us some understanding of the differences between the disabled and non disabled group within a cohort. There are limits to using data from successive cohorts to reliably infer trends in these differences.

Note: Updated figures were not available at the time of publication.

Data Source: Youth Cohort Study (YCS) Cohort 12, Sweep 3 (18 year olds in England and Wales in 2005/06)

Published: 01 December 2008

A8 – Young people with experience of higher education by age 19

Baseline and Trends: The chart below shows data from 2003/04, which will provide the baseline. This states 28% of disabled 19 year olds had experience of higher education in comparison to 41% of non disabled 19 year olds. This is a significant gap.

2003/04
Disabled 28%
Non disabled 41%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

Definition: YCS respondents report whether or not they are disabled; they are not asked about the type of disability. There is considerable volatility over time in the reporting of disability and the sample sizes tend to be small. Any analysis of the disabled group is subject to fairly wide confidence intervals. The YCS gives us some understanding of the differences between the disabled and non disabled group within a cohort. There are limits to using data from successive cohorts to reliably infer trends in these differences.

Note: Updated figures were not available at the time of publication.

Data Source: Youth Cohort Study (YCS) Cohort 11, Sweep 4 (19 year olds in England and Wales in 2003/04)

Published: 01 December 2008

A9 – First degree qualifiers attaining a first or upper second class degree

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005/06. Figures from 2005/06 state 56% of disabled students who complete their first degree attain a first class or upper second class degree in comparison to 59% of non disabled students. These figures have not significantly changed since the baseline.

Disabled Non disabled
2005/06 56% 59%
2006/07 56% 59%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

Definition: Disability is identified by students on the basis of their own self-assessment. For continuing students, where the information is not already known, institutions have the option of recording the student’s disability as not sought. As a result, some institutions have not returned disability data for some of their students. In addition, students are not obliged to report a disability. Higher Education Statistics Agency therefore advises that the figures reported in analyses are derived from a subset which may not be representative of the total student population. The data covers students in the UK.

Data Source: Higher Education Statistics Agency

Published: 17 June 2010

A10 – Students who do not continue in higher education after their first year

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2004/05. Figures from 2004/05 state 7.2% of young non disabled students, 5% of young disabled students in receipt of Disabled Student’s Allowance (DSA), and 8.6% of young disabled students not in receipt of DSA do not continue in higher education after their first year. The comparative figures for mature students are 14.5% for non disabled students, 11.2% for disabled students in receipt of DSA and 16.1% for disabled students not in receipt of DSA. These figures have not significantly changed since the baseline.

Disabled students not in receipt of DSA (%) Disabled students in receipt of DSA (%) Non disabled students (%)
2004/05 8.6 5.0 7.2
2005/06 8.6 5.6 7.1
  1. Disabled students not in receipt of DSA (%)
  2. Disabled students in receipt of DSA (%)
  3. Non disabled students (%)
Disabled students not in receipt of DSA (%) Disabled students in receipt of DSA (%) Non disabled students (%)
2004/05 16.1 11.2 14.5
2005/06 16.8 11.0 14.3
  1. Disabled students not in receipt of DSA (%)
  2. Disabled students in receipt of DSA (%)
  3. Non disabled students (%)

Definition: Disability is self reported where not in receipt of DSA. Young students are those under 21 on 30 September in the year they enter higher education. The data covers students in England.

Data Source: Higher Education Funding Council for England analysis of Higher Education Statistics Agency student records.

Published: 01 December 2008

A11 – Satisfaction levels with higher education course

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005. Figures from 2005 show that there are minimal differences in satisfaction levels with higher education courses between non disabled people (3.97), those with dyslexia (3.87) and those affected by other disabilities (3.94). These figures have not significantly changed since the baseline.

Dyslexia Other disability Non disabled
2005 3.87 3.94 3.97
2006 3.85 3.90 3.97
  1. Dyslexia
  2. Other disability
  3. Non disabled

Definition: Disability is self reported. Data covers England, Wales, Northern Ireland and some higher education institutions in Scotland. Respondents were asked to choose an answer ranging from “Definitely agree” (5) to “Definitely disagree” (1). The scale mean presented here is obtained by adding together the students’ responses to the items under each heading, and dividing by the number of items in the scale in order to get a measure which ranges from 1 to 5 in line with the original measurement scale. Thus, a score of 1 on a scale would represent a response of definitely disagree to all constituent items; while a score of 5 would represent a response of definitely agree to all the items on the scale.

Data Source: National Student Survey

Published: 01 December 2008

A12 – The first destination of graduates 6 months after graduating

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2004/05. Figures from 2004/05 state 59.3% of disabled graduates are in employment, compared to 64.2% of non disabled graduates, whilst 8.9% of disabled graduates are assumed to be unemployed, compared to 6.4% of non disabled graduates. Latest figures from 2006/07 state 60.6% of disabled graduates are in employment, compared to 66.7% of non disabled graduates, whilst 12% of disabled graduates are assumed to be unemployed, compared to 8.8% of non disabled graduates. At the time of publication information regarding the statistical significance of these changes was not available.

Disabled Non disabled
2004/05 In employment 59.3% 64.2%
In further study 15.7% 15.2%
In work and further study 8.7% 8.2%
Unemployed 8.9% 6.4%
Other 7.4% 6.0%
2005/06 In employment 61.0% 66.4%
In further study 15.8% 14.5%
In work and further study 9.2% 8.6%
Unemployed 12.4% 9.5%
Other 1.5% 1.1%
2006/07 In employment 60.6% 66.7%
In further study 16.8% 14.6%
In work and further study 9.1% 8.8%
Unemployed 12.0% 8.8%
Other 1.5% 1.1%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

Definition: Disability is self reported. The Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) Destinations of Leavers from Higher Education target population contains all United Kingdom (UK) and European Union (EU) domiciled students reported to HESA for the reporting period 1 August 2005 to 31 July 2006 as obtaining relevant qualifications and whose study was full-time or part-time (including sandwich students and those writing-up theses). Response rates to the destination of leavers are in the region of 80%. A full list of relevant qualifications and further information can be found at the Higher Education Statistics Agency website.

Note: Previously published figures were from 2004/05 but mislabelled as 2005/06.

Data Source: Higher Education Statistics Agency

A13 – 16-18 year olds not in employment, education or training (NEET)

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2007. Latest figures from 2009 show that 12.4% of 16-18 year olds with learning difficulties and/or disabilities (LDD) are not in education, employment or training compared to 6.0% of young people with no learning difficulties and/or disabilities. Comparative figures from 2007 show that 13.1 per cent of young people with learning difficulties and/or disabilities (LDD) were not in employment, education or training compared to 6.2 per cent of young people with no learning difficulties or disabilities. No significance testing has been carried out as figures are based on administrative data.

LDD No LDD
2007 13.1% 6.2%
2008 12.6% 6.4%
2009 12.0% 6.0%
  1. LDD
  2. No LDD

Definition: The definition of LDD given in the 2000 Learning and Skills Act; i.e. a young person has a learning difficulty and/or disability if (a) they have a significantly greater difficulty in learning than the majority of persons of their age, or (b) they have a disability which either prevents or hinders them from making use of facilities of a kind generally provided by institutions providing post-16 education or training. Around 5% of 16-18 year olds on the database have had no recent contact with Connexions, and so no current activity is recorded; NEET figures are adjusted to allow for this. Furthermore, the figures may not include those educated independently or others not known to Connexions. Percentages for 2007, 2008 and 2009 are calculated using 3-month average figures. Data covers England.

Note: Figures for 2007 and 2008 have been updated to be aligned with other NEET data. This indicator mirrors National Indicator No. 117, which is part of the “New Performance Framework for Local Authorities and Local Authority partnerships: Single Set of National Indicators”.

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): This indicator is used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy.

Data Source: Connexions Services

Published: 23 August 2010

A14 – Young people’s participation in positive activities

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2008. Figures from 2009 show that disabled young people were less likely to be involved in positive activities than non disabled young people. In 2009, 64 per cent of disabled young people were involved in positive activities compared to 66 per cent of non disabled young people. The percentage of non disabled young people involved in positive activities has significantly decreased since the baseline. No other figures have significantly changed since the baseline.

Disabled Non disabled
2008 66% 69%
2009 64% 66%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

Definition: Data covers young people in year 10 attending mainstream and special schools that have taken part in a group activity led by an adult outside school lessons in the past four weeks. The activities were defined as of one of the following:

  1. Sports club or class
  2. A youth centre or club to take part in organised activities
  3. Art, craft, dance, drama, film/video-making group.

Disabled respondents were defined in the survey as those young people who answered ‘Yes’ to the question ‘Do you have a disability?’ Data is for England.

Note: Comparison between years needs to be treated with caution – the 2008 data has been adjusted to account for different data collection timing (Summer opposed to Autumn term) and significance tests were calculated using a national design effect rather than a specific disability grouping effect. This indicator mirrors National Indicator No. 110.

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): This indicator is used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy. For more information please refer to:

Data Source: Tellus4 Survey

Published: 19 July 2010

B1 – Employment rates

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005. Figures from 2009 show that disabled people are significantly less likely to be in employment than non disabled people. The trend shows that there has consistently been an employment rate gap. In 2009, 47.4 per cent of disabled people were in employment compared to 77.3 per cent of non disabled people. Employment rates of non disabled people have significantly decreased since the baseline. No other figures have significantly changed since the baseline.

When these figures are broken down by full-time and part-time, data from 2009 shows 32.9 per cent of disabled people were in full-time employment, compared to 58.9 per cent of non disabled people; and 14.4 per cent of disabled people were in part-time employment, compared to 18.3 per cent of non disabled people. Both full-time and part-time employment rates of non disabled people have significantly decreased since the baseline. No other figures have significantly changed since the baseline.

Total employment rates
2002 Disabled 44.5%
Non Disabled 80.1%
2003 Disabled 45.4%
Non Disabled 80.2%
2004 Disabled 46.8%
Non Disabled 80.0%
2005 Disabled 47.0%
Non Disabled 79.9%
2006 Disabled 47.5%
Non Disabled 79.7%
2007 Disabled 47.2%
Non Disabled 79.5%
2008 Disabled 48.4%
Non Disabled 79.6%
2009 Disabled 47.4%
Non Disabled 77.3%

 

Full-time Part-time
2002 Disabled 31.5% 13.0%
Non Disabled 61.0% 19.0%
2003 Disabled 31.9% 13.5%
Non Disabled 61.0% 19.2%
2004 Disabled 32.4% 14.4%
Non Disabled 61.0% 19.0%
2005 Disabled 33.3% 13.6%
Non Disabled 61.1% 18.8%
2006 Disabled 33.3% 14.1%
Non Disabled 61.3% 18.4%
2007 Disabled 32.8% 14.4%
Non Disabled 61.2% 18.2%
2008 Disabled 34.3% 14.0%
Non Disabled 61.2% 18.2%
2009 Disabled 32.9% 14.4%
Non Disabled 58.9% 18.3%
  1. Total employment rates
  1. Full-time
  2. Part-time

Definition: The data covers all working age adults (males aged 16-64, females aged 16-59) who report they are in employment (including self employment). Respondents who report a current disability consistent with the Disability Discrimination Act are defined as disabled. The non disabled population refers to all those not classified as DDA disabled. Data is for Great Britain.

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): This indicator is used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy, which covers England only. Data for England only shows that, between 2007 (ILS baseline) and 2009 the employment rate of disabled people has increased from 47.8 per cent to 48.3 per cent, whilst the employment rate of non disabled people has decreased from 79.2 per cent to 77.1 per cent in the same period. Employment rates of non disabled people have significantly decreased since the baseline. No other figures have significantly changed since the baseline.

Note: Previously published Labour Force Survey figures have been updated to reflect changes to weighting variables. Caution must be taken when interpreting significant changes in the data due to time series variation.

Data Source: Labour Force Survey, Q2

Published: 01 June 2010

B2 – Employment rates by impairment type

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005. Figures from 2009 show that for the working-age disabled population, there are substantial disparities in employment outcomes. For example, the employment rate for people with depression or bad nerves is significantly lower than the employment rate for most other types of impairment.

2002 2002 2003 2003 2004 2004 2005 2005
Low 95% High 95% Low 95% High 95% Low 95% High 95% Low 95% High 95%
Arms, hands 38 45 42 49 43 51 46 53
Legs or feet 34 39 38 44 38 43 39 44
Back or neck 37 42 38 42 39 43 36 40
Skin conditions,allergies 65 79 54 69 54 69 60 75
Chest, breathing problems 63 68 60 65 60 65 61 67
Heart, blood,pressure, circulation 49 54 51 56 54 59 54 59
Stomach, liver, kidney, digestion 50 58 46 54 50 58 51 59
Diabetes 63 70 61 68 64 71 63 70
Depression, bad nerves 19 25 19 24 18 24 20 26
Epilepsy 36 47 NA NA 35 47 43 55
Progressive illness 35 43 35 42 39 46 40 48
Other problems, disabilities 49 55 51 57 52 58 52 58

 

2006 2006 2007 2007 2008 2008 2009
Low 95% High 95% Low 95% High 95% Low 95% High 95% Low 95% High 95%
Arms, hands 42 50 45 53 42 50 42 50
Legs or feet 37 43 39 45 39 45 38 44
Back or neck 40 45 39 44 41 46 40 45
Skin conditions,allergies NA NA NA NA 62 77 NA NA
Chest, breathing problems 62 67 60 65 60 65 60 66
Heart, blood,pressure, circulation 56 61 58 63 57 62 54 59
Stomach, liver, kidney, digestion 56 64 47 55 54 62 52 61
Diabetes 65 72 63 70 68 74 64 71
Depression, bad nerves 20 26 21 27 23 29 22 28
Epilepsy 36 48 NA NA 35 47 NA NA
Progressive illness 34 41 40 47 38 45 43 50
Other problems, disabilities 52 58 51 57 52 58 52 59

 

Definition: The data covers all working age adults (males aged 16-64, females aged 16-59) who report they are in employment (including self employment). Respondents who report a current disability consistent with the Disability Discrimination Act are defined as disabled.  Respondents who experience multiple difficulties are asked to identify their main impairment. Data is for Great Britain.

Note: Where an impairment category contains less than 100 responses the category is labelled ‘NA’, not available. In addition, some impairment types have been excluded from the table due to consistently small sample sizes over the time period. They are: difficulties in seeing, difficulties in hearing, mental illness, phobias and panics, learning difficulties and speech impediments. Significance testing on these figures has not been carried out.

Data Source: Labour Force Survey, Q2

Published: 26 July 2010

B3 – Economic activity

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005. Figures from 2005 state disabled people have been significantly less likely than non disabled people to be employees (40.3% compared to 70%) or self-employed (6.2% compared to 9.5%), and significantly more likely to be economically inactive (49.4% compared to 16.3%) or unemployed (7.1% compared to 4.5%). Latest data from 2008 shows that disabled people remain less likely than non disabled people to be employees (41.1% compared to 69.4%) or self-employed (6.7% compared to 9.7%), and more likely to be economically inactive (47.1% compared to 16.1%) or unemployed (8.6% compared to 5.1%).

Employee (%) Self Employed (%) Unemployed (%) Inactive (%)
2002 Disabled 38.4% 5.7% 6.9% 52.2%
Non Disabled 70.5% 9.1% 4.9% 15.8%
2003 Disabled 38.8% 6.2% 7.3% 51%
Non Disabled 70.2% 9.6% 4.6% 15.9%
2004 Disabled 39.8% 6.6% 6.4% 50%
Non Disabled 69.8% 9.7% 4.6% 16.1%
2005 Disabled 40.3% 6.2% 7.1% 49.4%
Non Disabled 70% 9.5% 4.5% 16.3%
2006 Disabled 40.3% 6.8% 8.4% 48.2%
Non Disabled 69.8% 9.5% 5.2% 15.9%
2007 Disabled 40.3% 6.5% 8.4% 48.4%
Non Disabled 69.4% 9.7% 5.1% 16.2%
2008 Disabled 41.1% 6.7% 8.6% 47.1%
Non Disabled 69.4% 9.7% 5.1% 16.1%

Definition: The data covers all working age adults (males aged 16-64, females aged 16-59). Respondents who report a current disability consistent with the Disability Discrimination Act are defined as disabled. Data is for Great Britain.

Note: All previously published Labour Force Survey figures have slightly changed due to the recent re-weighting of the survey population. Previously published figures regarding the ‘Unemployed’ category have been recalculated as a percentage of the economically active population, rather than the total working age population (which includes those who are inactive). The consequent increase in these figures does not represent an increase in the actual unemployment rate, but it is a direct consequence of such calculation methodology.

Data Source: Labour Force Survey, Q2

Published: 01 December 2008

B4 – Individuals in high-level employment

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005. Between 2005 and 2008, the percentage of individuals in high-level employment has

  • remained stable at around 48% amongst disabled people
  • increased from 53.6% to 55.3% amongst non disabled people

The high-level employment gap between disabled and non disabled people has widened from 4.9% in 2005 to 6.9% in 2008.

Year Disabled (%) Non disabled (%)
2002 46.3% 52.1%
2003 48.0% 52.8%
2004 47.9% 53.4%
2005 48.7% 53.6%
2006 47.7% 54.5%
2007 48.7% 54.8%
2008 48.4% 55.3%
  1. Disabled (%)
  2. Non disabled (%)

Definition: The data covers all working age adults (males aged 16-64, females aged 16-59) who report they are in employment (including self employment). High-level employment is considered to include those who report to be managers or senior officials, in professional occupations, are associate professionals or technical professionals, or work in skilled trade occupations. Respondents who report a current disability consistent with the Disability Discrimination Act are defined as disabled. Data is for Great Britain.

Note: All previously published Labour Force Survey figures have slightly changed due to the recent re-weighting of the survey population.

Data Source: Labour Force Survey, Q2

Published: 01 December 2008

B5 – Working age people who have never work

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005. Between 2005 and 2008, the percentage of working age people who have never worked has

  • increased from 7.8% to 8.4% amongst disabled people
  • increased from 7.4% to 8.1% amongst non disabled people

The gap between disabled and non disabled people has not significantly changed since the baseline.

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Disabled (%) 6.9% 7.0% 7.4% 7.8% 7.9% 8.7% 8.4%
Non disabled (%) 6.3% 6.6% 6.9% 7.4% 7.5% 8.0% 8.1%
  1. Disabled (%)
  2. Non disabled (%)

Definition: The data covers all working age adults (males aged 16-64, females aged 16-59) who report they have never worked according to National Statistics Socio-economics Classification. Respondents who report a current disability consistent with the Disability Discrimination Act are defined as disabled. Data is for Great Britain.

Note: All previously published Labour Force Survey figures have slightly changed due to the recent re-weighting of the survey population. Previously published figures have been recalculated taking those who are either currently ILO unemployed or inactive, and that have said they have never had a paid job. This has then been expressed as a percentage of the working age population.

Data Source: Labour Force Survey, Q2

Published: 01 December 2008

B6 – Working age people in work who would like to work more hours

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005. Between 2005 and 2008, the percentage of working age people in work who would like to work more hours has

  • increased from 8.3% to 9.2% amongst disabled people
  • increased from 6.9% to 7.6% amongst non disabled people

The gap between disabled and non disabled people has not significantly changed since the baseline.

Disabled Non disabled
2002 8.1% 7.3%
2003 7.5% 6.9%
2004 6.9% 6.7%
2005 8.3% 6.9%
2006 8.3% 7.0%
2007 7.9% 7.2%
2008 9.2% 7.6%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

Definition: The data covers all working age adults (males aged 16-64, females aged 16-59) who report they are in employment (including self employment) and would like to work more hours at the basic rate of pay. Respondents who report a current disability consistent with the Disability Discrimination Act are defined as disabled. Data is for Great Britain.

Note: All previously published Labour Force Survey figures have slightly changed due to the recent re-weighting of the survey population

Data Source: Labour Force Survey, Q2

Published: 01 December 2008

B7 – Hourly Wage Rates

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005. Between 2005 and 2008, average hourly wage rates have

  • increased from £9.78 to £11.19 amongst disabled people
  • increased from £10.84 to £11.96 amongst non disabled people

The pay gap between disabled and non disabled people has not significantly changed since the baseline.

Year Disabled (Pounds per hour) Non disabled (Pounds per hour)
2002 8.72 9.66
2003 9.17 9.95
2004 9.63 10.48
2005 9.78 10.84
2006 10.51 11.19
2007 10.36 11.66
2008 11.19 11.96
  1. Disabled (Pounds per hour)
  2. Non disabled (Pounds per hour)

Definition: The data covers all working age adults (males aged 16-64, females aged 16-59) who report they are in employment (including self employment) and their wage rate. Respondents who report a current disability consistent with the Disability Discrimination Act are defined as disabled. Data is for Great Britain.

Data Source: Labour Force Survey, Q2

Published: 01 December 2008

B8 – Highest educational qualifications in the working age population

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005. Between 2005 and 2008, the percentage of working age people with no qualification has

  • decreased from 26.7% to 24.3% amongst disabled people
  • decreased from 11.5% to 10% amongst non disabled people

During the same period, the percentage of working age people with Level 2 qualifications has remained stable amongst both disabled people (12.7%) and non disabled people (16.4%), whilst the percentage of working age people with degree-level qualifications has

  • remained stable amongst disabled people at around 10%
  • increased from 19.4% to 21.8% amongst non disabled people.
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Disabled 29.9% 28.4% 28.2% 26.7% 26.4% 26.0% 24.3%
Non disabled 13.1% 12.4% 12.1% 11.5% 10.9% 10.7% 10.0%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Disabled 11.7% 11.5% 11.6% 12.7% 13.2% 12.4% 13.5%
Non disabled 15.8% 15.9% 15.6% 16.4% 16.5% 16.3% 16.4%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Disabled 8.2% 8.4% 9.7% 9.9% 10.8% 11.2% 11.4%
Non disabled 17.1% 17.9% 18.9% 19.4% 20.4% 21.2% 21.8%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

Definition: The data covers working age adults (males aged 16-64, females aged 16-59). Educational qualifications/levels reported here are intended as the highest qualification/level held. Respondents who report a current disability consistent with the Disability Discrimination Act are defined as disabled. Level 2 qualifications equate to 5 A*-C GCSE grades or their equivalent. Data is for Great Britain.

Note: All previously published Labour Force Survey figures have slightly changed due to the recent re-weighting of the survey population. This indicator has been expanded to include data on degree-level qualifications and absence of qualification.

Data Source: Labour Force Survey, Q2

Published: 01 December 2008

C1 – Children living below 60% median equivalised household income

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2004/05. Before Housing Costs, there has been no statistically significant change since the baseline registered through this indicator. After Housing Costs, the only significant changes registered between 2004/05 and 2008/09 have affected the percentage of children living in low incomein families where no one is disabled, which increased from 26% to 28%, and the percentage of children living in low income in families with disabled children regardless of adult disability, which increased from 32% to 37%.

Before and After Housing Costs, there have been no statistically significant changes since 2007/08 registered through this indicator.

On both Before and After Housing Costs bases:

  • the proportion of children in low income is significantly higher in families where at least one member is disabled than families where no one is disabled
  • the proportion of children in low income is significantly higher in families where at least one child is disabled than families where no one is disabled
  • there is no significant difference in the proportion of children in low income where at least one child is disabled and families where at least one member is disabled
2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09
Children in families where at least one member is disabled 29% 27% 29% 28% 30% 32% 29%
Children in families with disabled children regardless of adult disability 25% 23% 25% 22% 27% 29% 28%
Children in families where no one is disabled 21% 21% 19% 20% 20% 20% 20%
  1. Children in families where at least one member is disabled
  2. Children in families with disabled children regardless of adult disability
  3. Children in families where no one is disabled
2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09
Children in families where at least one member is disabled 37% 36% 38% 37% 38% 41% 39%
Children in families with disabled children regardless of adult disability 32% 31% 32% 30% 34% 38% 37%
Children in families where no one is disabled 28% 26% 26% 27% 28% 28% 28%
  1. Children in families where at least one member is disabled
  2. Children in families with disabled children regardless of adult disability
  3. Children in families where no one is disabled

Definition: Disabled people are defined as respondents who report a limiting long standing illness, impairment or disability. Everyone in this group is likely to meet the definition of disability in the Disability Discrimination Act. Data is for United Kingdom.

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): This indicator is used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy, which covers England only. Data for England shows that in 2008/09 on a Before Housing Cost basis, 20 per cent of children in families where no one is disabled were living in income poverty compared to 29 per cent of children in families with disabled children regardless of adult disability and 29 per cent of children in families where at least one member is disabled. On an After Housing Cost basis, 28 per cent of children in families where no one is disabled were living in income poverty compared to 38 per cent of children in families with disabled children regardless of adult disability and 40 per cent of children in families where at least one member is disabled. On both Before and After Housing Costs bases, there have been no statistically significant changes since 2007/08 ILS baseline registered through this indicator.

On both Before and After Housing Costs bases:

  • the proportion of children in low income is significantly higher in families where at least one member is disabled than families where no one is disabled
  • the proportion of children in low income is significantly higher in families where at least one child is disabled than families where no one is disabled
  • there is no significant difference in the proportion of children in low income where at least one child is disabled and families where at least one member is disabled

Data Source: Family Resources Survey 2008/09

Published: 20 May 2010

C2 – Children living in low income and material deprivation

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2004/05. The proportion of children in low income and material deprivation is similar in 2008/09 to that in 2004/05 for each type of family.

The lowest proportion of children living in low income and material deprivation are in families where no-one is disabled. A higher proportion of children in families with any disabled member live in low income and material deprivation than children in families where no one is disabled.

Children in households where no-one is disabled Disabled children regardless of adult disabilty Children in households where at least one member is disabled
2004/05 14% 25% 28%
2005/06 13% 21% 26%
2006/07 13% 23% 25%
2007/08 14% 26% 28%
2008/09 14% 26% 27%
  1. Children in households where no-one is disabled
  2. Disabled children regardless of adult disabilty
  3. Children in households where at least one member is disabled

Definition: Disabled people are defined as respondents who report a limiting long standing illness, impairment or disability. Everyone in this group is likely to meet the definition of disability in the Disability Discrimination Act. Data is for United Kingdom.

A child is considered to be living in low income and material deprivation if they live in a family that has a material deprivation score of 25 or more and a household income below 70 per cent contemporary median income, Before Housing Costs, see Households Below Average Income for further details.

Data Source: Family Resources Survey 2008/09

Published: 20 May 2010

C3 – Individuals living below 60% median equivalised household income

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2004/05. Both Before and After Housing Costs, there have been no statistically significant changes between 2004/05 and 2008/09 in the percentage of individuals living in low income in families where at least one member is disabled; there have been statistically significant increases in the percentage of individuals living in low income in families where no one is disabled.

Both Before and After Housing Costs, there has been a statistically significant decrease in the percentage of individuals living in low income in families where at least one member is disabled since 2007/08, compared to no statistically significant change in the percentage of individuals living in low income in families where no member is disabled.

Both Before and After Housing Costs, a higher proportion of individuals living in families with at least one disabled member live in low income, compared to individuals living in families with no disabled members.

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09
Individuals in families where no one is disabled 16% 16% 15% 16% 16% 16% 16%
Individuals in families where at least one member is disabled 23% 22% 23% 22% 24% 25% 23%
  1. Individuals in families where no one is disabled
  2. Individuals in families where at least one member is disabled
2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09
Individuals in families where no one is disabled 20% 20% 19% 20% 20% 20% 21%
Individuals in families where at least one member is disabled 28% 26% 25% 25% 27% 28% 26%
  1. Individuals in families where no one is disabled
  2. Individuals in families where at least one member is disabled

Definition: Disabled people are defined as respondents who report a limiting long standing illness, impairment or disability. Everyone in this group is likely to meet the definition of disability in the Disability Discrimination Act. Data is for United Kingdom.

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): This indicator is used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy, which covers England only. Data for England shows that in 2008/09 on a Before Housing Cost basis, 16 per cent of individuals in families where no one is disabled were living in income poverty, compared to 22 per cent of individuals in families where at least one member is disabled. On an After Housing Cost basis, 21 per cent of individuals in families where no one is disabled were living in income poverty, compared to 26 per cent of individuals in families where at least one member is disabled.

Both Before and After Housing Costs, there has been a statistically significant decrease in the percentage of individuals living in low income in families where at least one member is disabled since 2007/08 ILS baseline, compared to no statistically significant change in the percentage of individuals living in low income in families where no member is disabled.

Both Before and After Housing Costs, a higher proportion of individuals living in families with at least one disabled member live in low income, compared to individuals living in families with no disabled members. This gap is statistically significant.

Data Source: Family Resources Survey 2008/09

Published: 20 May 2010

Illustrative measures of living standards, excluding DLA and Attendance Allowance from income

Standard measures of income poverty do not take any account of additional costs associated with disability, which is likely to mean that the position of disabled people in the income distribution may be somewhat upwardly biased. Whilst it is recognised that there are additional costs associated with disability, research shows that these vary significantly in level and nature, and there is no general agreement on how to measure these costs. The combined low income and material deprivation indicator allows a fuller assessment of the living standards of those households facing particular difficulties due to high living costs, including those associated with disability.

The following measures exclude Disability Living Allowance and Attendance Allowance from income, as these are benefits paid as a contribution towards the extra costs of disability. This has the effect of increasing the percentage of families with disabled members shown as living in poverty.

Children living in low income

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2004/05. Before Housing Costs, there has been no statistically significant change since the baseline. After Housing Costs, the only significant change registered between 2004/05 and 2008/09 has affected the percentage of children living in low income in families where no one is disabled, which increased from 25 per cent to 26 per cent.
Before and After Housing Costs, there have been statistically significant decreases since 2007/08 in the percentage of children living in low income in families where at least one member is disabled.

On both Before and After Housing Costs bases:

  • the proportion of children in low income is significantly higher in families where at least one member is disabled than families where no one is disabled
  • the proportion of children in low income is significantly higher in families where at least one child is disabled than families where no one is disabled
  • there is no significant difference in the proportion of children in low income in families where at least one child is disabled and families where at least one member is disabled
2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09
Children in families where at least one person is disabled 31% 30% 32% 30% 32% 35% 31%
Children in families with disabled children regardless of adult disability 28% 26% 28% 24% 29% 32% 31%
Children in families where no one is disabled 19% 19% 18% 19% 19% 18% 19%
  1. Children in families where at least one person is disabled
  2. Children in families with disabled children regardless of adult disability
  3. Children in families where no one is disabled
2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09
Children in families where at least one person is disabled 40% 39% 41% 39% 40% 45% 41%
Children in families with disabled children regardless of adult disability 38% 35% 37% 33% 37% 42% 41%
Children in families where no one is disabled 26% 26% 25% 26% 27% 27% 26%
  1. Children in families where at least one person is disabled
  2. Children in families with disabled children regardless of adult disability
  3. Children in families where no one is disabled

Definition: Disabled people are defined as respondents who report a limiting long standing illness, impairment or disability. Everyone in this group is likely to meet the definition of disability in the Disability Discrimination. Data is for United Kingdom.

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): This indicator is used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy, which covers England only. Data for England shows that in 2008/09 on a Before Housing Cost basis, 18 per cent of children in families where no one is disabled were living in income poverty compared to 31 per cent of children in families with disabled children regardless of adult disability and 31 per cent of children in families where at least one member is disabled. On an After Housing Cost basis, 27 per cent of children in families where no one is disabled were living in income poverty compared to 42 per cent of children in families with disabled children regardless of adult disability and 42 per cent of children in families where at least one member is disabled. On both Before and After Housing Costs bases, there have been no statistically significant changes since 2007/08 ILS baseline registered through this indicator.

On both Before and After Housing Costs bases:

  • the proportion of children in low income is significantly higher in families where at least one member is disabled than families where no one is disabled
  • the proportion of children in low income is significantly higher in families where at least one child is disabled than families where no one is disabled
  • there is no significant difference in the proportion of children in low income where at least one child is disabled and families where at least one member is disabled

Data Source: Family Resources Survey 2008/09

Children living in low income and material deprivation

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2004/05. The proportion of children in low income and material deprivation is similar in 2008/09 to that in 2004/05 for children in families where no one is disabled and for children in families where at least one member is disabled; and higher for children in families with disabled children regardless of adult disability.

The lowest proportion of children living in low income and material deprivation live in families where no one is disabled. A higher proportion of children in families with any disabled member live in low income and material deprivation than children in families where no one is disabled.

2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09
Children in families where at least one person is disabled 31% 28% 28% 31% 30%
Children in families with disabled children regardless of adult disability 27% 24% 26% 29% 30%
Children in families where no one is disabled 14% 13% 13% 14% 14%
  1. Children in families where at least one person is disabled
  2. Children in families with disabled children regardless of adult disability
  3. Children in families where no one is disabled

Definition: Disabled people are defined as respondents who report a limiting long standing illness, impairment or disability. Everyone in this group is likely to meet the definition of disability in the Disability Discrimination Act. Data is for United Kingdom.

A child is considered to be living in low income and material deprivation if they live in a family that has a material deprivation score of 25 or more and a household income below 70 per cent contemporary median income, Before Housing Costs, see Households Below Average Income for further details.

Data Source: Family Resources Survey 2008/09

Individuals living in low income

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2004/05.

Both Before and After Housing Costs, there have been no statistically significant changes between 2004/05 and 2008/09 in the percentage of individuals living in low income in families where at least one member is disabled; there have been statistically significant increases in the percentage of individuals living in low income in families where no one is disabled.

Both Before and After Housing Costs, there has been a statistically significant decrease in the percentage of individuals living in low income in families where at least one member is disabled since 2007/08, compared to no statistically significant change in the percentage of individuals living in low income in families where no member is disabled.

Both Before and After Housing Costs, a higher proportion of individuals living in families with at least one disabled member live in low income, compared to individuals living in families with no disabled members.

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09
Individuals in families where at least one member is disabled 28% 28% 28% 26% 29% 30% 27%
Individuals in families where no one is disabled 15% 15% 14% 15% 15% 15% 16%
  1. Individuals in families where at least one member is disabled
  2. Individuals in families where no one is disabled
2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09
Individuals in families where at least one member is disabled 33% 32% 31% 30% 32% 33% 30%
Individuals in families where no one is disabled 19% 19% 18% 19% 20% 20% 20%
  1. Individuals in families where at least one member is disabled
  2. Individuals in families where no one is disabled

Definition: Disabled people are defined as respondents who report a limiting long standing illness, impairment or disability. Everyone in this group is likely to meet the definition of disability in the Disability Discrimination Act. Data is for United Kingdom.

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): This indicator is used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy, which covers England only. Data for England shows that in 2008/09 on a Before Housing Cost basis, 16 per cent of individuals in families where no one is disabled were living in income poverty, compared to 26 per cent of individuals in families where at least one member is disabled. On an After Housing Cost basis, 21 per cent of individuals in families where no one is disabled were living in income poverty, compared to 30 per cent of individuals in families where at least one member is disabled.

Both Before and After Housing Costs, there has been a statistically significant decrease in the percentage of individuals living in low income in families where at least one member is disabled since 2007/08 ILS baseline, compared to no statistically significant change in the percentage of individuals living in low income in families where no member is disabled.

Both Before and After Housing Costs, a higher proportion of individuals living in families with at least one disabled member live in low income, compared to individuals living in families with no disabled members. This gap is statistically significant.

Data Source: Family Resources Survey 2008/09

Published: 26 July 2010

C4 – Households living in fuel poverty

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005. Figures from 2008 show that 20.3 per cent of households including a disabled person live in fuel poverty, compared to 13.6 per cent of households with no disabled person. Between 2005 and 2008, the percentage of households living in fuel poverty has:

  • increased from 9.8 per cent to 20.3 per cent in households including a disabled person
  • increased from 6.2 per cent to 13.6 per cent households with no disabled person.

Statistical significance tests have not been applied due to the complex nature of the sampling methodology used in the survey.

Disabled Non disabled
2004 8.4% 4.9%
2005 9.8% 6.2%
2006 14.8% 10.1%
2007 16.6% 11.7%
2008 20.3% 13.6%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

Definition: Households affected by disability are defined as households containing at least one respondent who reports a long term disability, illness or infirmity that limits their activities. A household is defined as fuel poor if it needs to spend more than 10% of household income on fuel to maintain a satisfactory heating regime (usually 21°C for the main living area and 18°C for other occupied rooms). Data is for England.

For more information see the fuel poverty statistics and fuel poverty policies at the Department of Energy and Climate Change website.

Data Source: DECC fuel poverty data/CLG English House Condition Survey

Published: 01 November 2010

C5 – Individuals living in persistent poverty

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2002-05. Figures from 2004-07 show that disabled adults are more likely to live in persistent poverty than non disabled adults. Before housing costs, figures from 2004-07 state 11 per cent of disabled adults were living in persistent poverty, compared to 5 per cent of non disabled adults. After housing costs, 10 per cent of disabled adults were living in persistent poverty, compared to 6 per cent of non disabled adults.

On a before housing cost basis, the proportions of both disabled and non disabled adults living in persistent poverty have not changed since the baseline. Also, on an after housing cost basis, the proportion of non disabled adults also has not changed since the baseline. However, on an after housing cost basis, data is moving in the right direction for disabled adults; the proportions of disabled adults living in persistent poverty has decreased since the baseline from 12 per cent to 10 per cent of disabled adults. Our current significance testing methodology does not cover this type of statistic.

1999-02 2000-03 2001-04 2002-05 2003-06 2004-07
Disabled 13% 15% 13% 12% 12% 11%
Non disabled 7% 7% 6% 6% 6% 5%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled
1999-02 2000-03 2001-04 2002-05 2003-06 2004-07
Disabled 14% 16% 14% 12% 10% 10%
Non disabled 8% 7% 7% 7% 7% 6%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

Definition: A disabled adult is defined as someone aged over 18 or over 16 if not in full time education, whose work, or amount of work that he/she is able to do, is limited by his/her health condition(s). For the purpose of creating the persistent poverty indicator, an individual is characterised as disabled if he/she has had a disability in any of the 4 years considered. Low-income is defined in terms of threshold of median income, specifically 60% of median income, and is based on the median of the survey year in question. Persistent low-income is defined by spending 3 or more years, out of any 4-year period, in a household with below 60% of median income. Data covers Great Britain.

Data Source: British Household Panel Survey

Published: 03 December 2009

D1 – Unfair Treatment at work

Baseline and Trends: Baseline – 2005. Figures from 2008 show that disabled people were significantly more likely to experience unfair treatment at work than non disabled people. In 2008, 19 per cent of disabled people experienced unfair treatment at work compared to 13 per cent of non disabled people. These figures cannot be compared to the 2005 baseline for the reasons outlined below.

Disabled Non disabled
2005 15.1% 6.0%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled
Disabled Non disabled
2008 19% 13%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

Definition: Changes to the sampling collection method prevent significance testing from being carried out between years. In addition, the definition of unfair treatment at work has also changed between years. In 2005, unfair treatment related to a respondent’s experience of unfair treatment, with their current or most recent employer, within the previous two years as a result of their age, gender, disability, etc.

The full list can be found in the 2005 Fair Treatment at Work report (page 19). In 2008, unfair treatment refers to a respondent being treated unfairly compared to others in the workplace. It also includes experience of unfair treatment with a previous employer in the last two years. Further details can be found in the 2008 Fair Treatment at Work report (page 64). Respondents who identify having a long-term illness, health problem or disability are defined as disabled. Data is for Great Britain.

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): This indicator is used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy, which covers England only. Data for England only shows a similar result; disabled people in England were significantly more likely to experience unfair treatment at work than non disabled people. In 2008, 20 per cent of disabled people experienced unfair treatment at work compared to 13 per cent of non disabled people.

Data Source: Fair Treatment at Work Survey

Published: 08 December 2009

D2 – The awareness of the DDA of the general population

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005. Figures from 2009 show that 72 per cent of the general population were aware of the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA). These figures have not significantly changed since the baseline.

Percentage of population
2005 73.2%
2006 72.5%
2007 71.6%
2008 74.9%
2009 72.0%
  1. Percentage of population

Definition: The ONS Opinions Survey selects a random sample of individuals aged 16 years and over living in private households in Great Britain. This indicator looks at awareness of the Disability Discrimination Act in the general survey population without being prompted of its aims/coverage. Data aggregates the 8 waves of the survey run in each year.

Data Source: ONS Opinions Survey

Published: 01 February 2010

D3 – Fair treatment by local public services

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2008. Figures from 2008 show that 71 per cent of disabled people believe that they have been treated with respect and consideration by their local public services compared to 73 per cent of non disabled people.

Disabled Non disabled
2008 71% 73%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

Definition: The figures above reflect the percentage of respondents who feel that they have been treated with respect and consideration by their local public services. Disabled respondents are defined as those respondents who say they have any long standing illness, disability or infirmity (long standing means anything that has troubled you over a period of time or that is likely to affect you over a period of time). Data is for England.

The Place Survey is designed to be carried out by local authorities to collect information about local resident’s perceptions of their local area and the local services they receive. It is a postal (self-completion) survey. Postal surveys, whereby the respondent completes the questionnaire without assistance from a survey interviewer, are much less costly to carry out compared with face-to-face surveys. However, postal surveys can present greater challenges in terms of accurately measuring the views of particularly hard-to-reach groups, such as disabled residents.

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): This indicator is used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy. For more information please refer to the Independent Living pages.

Data Source: Place Survey

Published: 19 July 2010

E1 – Volunteering

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005. Figures from 2009-10 show that disabled people are significantly less likely to engage in formal volunteering. In 2009-10, 22 per cent of disabled people engaged in formal volunteering at least once a month compared with 26 per cent of non disabled people, whilst 28 per cent of disabled people engaged in informal volunteering at least once a month compared with 30 per cent of non disabled people. Participation rates for formal volunteering of non disabled people have significantly decreased since the baseline. Participation rates for informal volunteering for both disabled and non disabled people have significantly decreased since the baseline. No other figures have significantly changed since the baseline.

Disabled Non disabled
2001 23% 28%
2003 23% 29%
2005 23% 30%
2007/08 22% 28%
2008/09 21% 27%
2009/10 22% 26%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled
Disabled Non disabled
2001 33% 34%
2003 35% 38%
2005 35% 37%
2007/08 33% 36%
2008/09 36% 35%
2009/10 28% 30%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

Definition: Disability is defined as having a long standing illness or disability that limits activity. Data is for adults (aged 16 or over) only. Informal volunteering is defined as giving help or support to someone who is not a relative and formal volunteering is defined as giving unpaid help to groups, clubs or organisations. Data covers England.

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): This indicator is used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy, for which the baseline is 2007/08.

Data Source: Citizenship Survey

Published: 23 August 2010

E2 – Civic involvement

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005. Figures from 2009-10 show that disabled people were significantly less likely to have engaged in civic involvement than non disabled people. In 2009-10, 60 per cent of non disabled people undertook at least one activity of civic involvement in the last 12 months compared with 55 per cent of disabled people. The percentage of non disabled people engaged in civic involvement has significantly decreased since the baseline. No other figures have significantly changed since the baseline.

Civic involvement includes formal volunteering, civic activism, civic participation and civic consultation. Please see definition section for further details.

Disabled Non disabled
2005 58% 66%
2007/08 58% 64%
2008/09 60% 62%
2009/10 55% 60%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

Civic participation, consultation and activism

Disaggregated by activity, figures from 2009-10 show that disabled people were just as likely to have been involved in civic participation, civic consultation and civic activism compared to non disabled people.

In 2009-10, 35 per cent of disabled people were engaged in civic participation compared with 34 per cent of non disabled people. In the same period, 19 per cent of disabled people compared with 18 per cent of non disabled people were involved in civic consultation and 10 per cent of both disabled people and non disabled people were involved in civic activism. None of these differences are statistically significant. The percentage of non disabled people involved in civic participation and civic consultation has significantly decreased since the baseline. No other figures have significantly changed since the baseline.

2005 2006/7 2008/9 2009/10
Disabled Non disabled Disabled Non disabled Disabled Non disabled Disabled Non disabled
Civic participation 38% 38% 38% 39% 42% 37% 35% 34%
Civic consultation 20% 20% 21% 21% 20% 20% 19% 18%
Civic activism 8% 9% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10%

Definition: Disability is defined as having a long standing illness or disability that limits activity. Data covers England and includes adults only (aged 16 or over). Civic involvement is defined by an individual reporting that they had undertaken at least one of the activities below in the past 12 months:

  • Civic participation – contacting a local councillor, MP, local council official, government official, attending a public meeting or rally, taking part in a public demonstration, or protest, signing a petition
  • Civic consultation – taking part in consultation by completing a questionnaire, attending a public meeting or being involved in a group to discuss local services
  • Civic activism – being a local councillor, school governor, a volunteer Special Constable or a Magistrate; being a member of a decision making group about local services e.g., local health services
  • Formal volunteering – unpaid help to groups, clubs or organisations (this information is located in indicator E1)

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): The civic participation sub-indicator is used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy, for which the baseline is 2007/08.

Data Source: Citizenship Survey

Published: 29 August 2010

E3 – Participation in cultural, leisure and sporting activities

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year � 2005/06. Figures from 2009/10 show that disabled people remain significantly less likely to participate in all cultural, leisure and sporting activities than non disabled people. Such activities include:

  • using a public library service
  • visiting a museum, gallery or archive
  • engaging with the arts
  • visiting a historic environment site
  • participation in sports
  • going to the cinema.

Participation in culture, leisure and sports by activity

A breakdown of participation in culture, leisure and sporting activities by sector reveals significant changes between both disabled and non-disabled people from the baseline year (2005/06).

Compared with the 2005/06 baseline, disabled people are significantly less likely to have:

  • participated in moderate intensity level sports
  • attended a historic environment site
  • attended a library.

Similarly, non-disabled people are significantly less likely to have:

  • attended a library.

Compared with the 2005/06 baseline, disabled people are significantly more likely to have:

  • attended a cinema
  • attended a museum or gallery.

Similarly, non-disabled people are significantly more likely to have:

  • attended a museum or gallery.
2005/06 2006/07 2007/08
Disabled (%) Non disabled (%) Disabled (%) Non disabled (%) Disabled (%) Non disabled (%)
Arts attendance 21.4 36.3 24.2 35.4 25.1 36.7
Arts participation 18.9 25.6 19.8 23.7 18.7 23.6
Engagement with the arts
Moderate-intensity level sport 9.5 24.2 9.4 24.9 9.7 25.8
Cinema 32.6 57.7 32.0 57.3 30.5 57.1
Libraries 42.2 49.8 39.1 48.0 40.6 46.2
Historic environment sites 59.5 72.7 60.2 71.7 60.9 73.7
Museums and galleries 32.1 45.1 31.1 44.4 33.1 46.2
2008/09 2009/10
Disabled (%) Non disabled (%) Disabled (%) Non disabled (%)
Arts attendance
Arts participation 68.6 78.3
Engagement with the arts 51.1 62.0 33.6 60.7
Moderate-intensity level
sport
9.2 26.1 9.2 26.1
Cinema 33.7 55.7 34.5 57.5
Libraries 37.0 42.1 36.8 40.4
Historic environment sites 46.6 59.6 62.2 72.5
Museums and galleries 34.4 47.1 39.2 49.5

 

 

Definition: Disability is defined as having any long-standing illness, disability or infirmity that limits activity in any way. Data covers England. Definitions of participation are as follows:

  • Arts attendance and arts participation – attendance/participation at least twice in the past 12 months
  • Engagement with the arts – attendance/participation at least once in the past 12 months
  • Moderate intensity level sport – participation in at least 30 minutes of moderate intensity level sport at least once in the past 4 weeks
  • Historic environment, museums and galleries, cinema and libraries – attendance at least once in the past 12 months.

As of 2008/09, the Taking Part Survey no longer collects information regarding participation in active sports. In addition, arts attendance and arts participation has become a combined measure known as engagement with the arts.

Note: Previously published figures may have changed due to revisions made to the data.

Data Source: Taking Part Survey

Published: 01 November 2010

F1 – Full size buses with low floor wheelchair access

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005/06. Between 2005/06 and 2007/08, the percentage of buses with low floor wheelchair access has increased from 50.4% to 62%.

Great Britain
2001/02 26.4%
2002/03 29.0%
2003/04 39.0%
2004/05 46.0%
2005/06 50.4%
2006/07 53.7%
2007/08 62.0%
  1. Great Britain

Definition: The accessibility of buses is measured by annual data for the percentage of vehicles which meet Public Sector Vehicle Accessibility Requirements (PSVAR). In practical outcomes this means the percentage of low floor full size buses in Great Britain with wheelchair access.

Note: Previously published figures have been revised slightly following further data quality assurance. More information can be obtained from the Department for Transport’s Public Transport Statistics Bulletin GB: 2008 edition.

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): This indicator is used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy, which covers England only. Data for England only shows that, in 2007/08 (ILS baseline) the percentage of buses with low floor wheelchair access was 65.9%.

Data Source: Department for Transport’s annual sample survey of bus operators.

Published: 07 January 2009

F2 – Difficulties in using transport

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005. Figures from 2009 show that disabled people are significantly less likely to report having difficulties in using transport than they were in 2005. In 2009, 22 per cent of disabled people experienced difficulties when using transport. These figures have decreased significantly since the baseline.

Percentage of disabled population
2005 25%
2006 23%
2007 24%
2008 23%
2009 22%
  1. Percentage of disabled population

Definition: The above figures cover all respondents who report a disability consistent with the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) who say they have had problems in the last 12 months getting to and from transport hubs, getting on or off vehicles, changing modes of transports, travelling by minicab or taxi, booking tickets, ensuring assistance is available, difficulties in crossing roads, using pavements, using pedestrian areas or any other difficulties when travelling. Data is for individuals in private households aged 16 and over in Great Britain. Data aggregates 8 monthly waves of the survey run in each year except 2007 where data aggregates 6 waves only.

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): This indicator is used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy, which covers England only. Data for England shows that between 2007 (ILS baseline) and 2009, the percentage of disabled people that report having difficulties in using transport has decreased from 24 per cent to 22 per cent. These figures have not significantly changed since the baseline.

Data Source: ONS Opinions Survey

Published: 28 January 2010

F3 – Households with access to the internet

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005. Between 2005 and 2006, the proportion of households with access to the internet has

  • remained stable at 49% amongst households where someone is disabled
  • increased from 66.8% to 71% amongst households where no one is disabled

The gap between disabled and non disabled households has widened from 17.9% in 2005 to 21.9% in 2006.

Disabled Non disabled
2005 48.9% 66.8%
2006 49.0% 71.0%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

Definition: Disabled respondents are those with a long-standing illness. Internet access is determined by the survey respondent answering the question ‘does anyone in the household have access to the internet?’.

Data Source: British Social Attitudes Survey

Published: 01 December 2008

F4 – Difficulties in accessing goods or services

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2005. Figures from 2009 show that disabled people are significantly less likely to report having difficulties accessing goods and services than in 2005. In 2009, 32 per cent of disabled people experience difficulties in accessing goods or services related to their impairment or disability. These figures have significantly decreased since the baseline.

Percentage of disabled population
2005 37%
2006 36%
2007 33%
2008 32%
2009 32%
  1. Percentage of disabled population

Definition: The above figure covers all respondents who are currently disabled or have been disabled in the past according to the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) who say they have had problems in the last 12 months related to their health problem or disability in accessing facilities at a private club, going to the cinema/theatre/concert, going to the library/art galleries/museums, shopping, pubs/restaurants, sporting events, using public telephone, using websites, using a bank or building society, arranging insurance, arranging accommodation in a hotel/guest house, accessing health services/Local Authority services, Central Government services, law enforcement services, or other any other leisure, commercial or public good or service. Data is for individuals in private households aged 16 over in Great Britain. Data aggregates the 8 waves of the survey run in each year.

Data Source: ONS Opinions Survey

Published: 28 January 2010

F5 – Adults without savings and bank accounts

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2004/05. Between 2004/05 and 2006/07, the percentage of adults who do not hold savings or bank accounts has

  • increased from 10.4% to 11.6% amongst disabled people
  • increased from 6.4% to 7.1% amongst non disabled people

The gap between disabled and non disabled people has widened from 4% in 2004/05 to 4.6% in 2006/07.

Disabled Non disabled
2004/05 10.4% 6.4%
2005/06 10.2% 6.6%
2006/07 11.6% 7.1%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

Definition: Disabled people are defined as respondents who report a limiting long standing illness, impairment or disability. Everyone in this group would meet the definition of disability in the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA); however, these estimates do not reflect the total number of people covered by the DDA as the FRS does not collect this information. Data is for Great Britain. Savings or bank accounts include: current accounts, NSI savings accounts, basic bank accounts, ISAs, and other bank / building society accounts.

Data Source: Family Resources Survey

Published: 01 December 2008

G1 – Suitability of accommodation for disabled people requiring adaptations to their home

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2004/05. Figures from 2007/08 show that 80 per cent of disabled people requiring adaptations to their home felt their accommodation was suitable for their needs. These figures have not significantly changed since the baseline.

Percentage of disabled population requiring adaptations
2002/03 74%
2003/04 77%
2004/05 80%
2005/06 75%
2006/07 78%
2007/08 80%
  1. Percentage of disabled population requiring adaptations

Definition: Disability is identified as any household member having a serious long-standing medical condition or disability. Long-standing is defined as anything which has troubled them for a period of at least 12 months or that is likely to affect them over a period of at least 12 months. Households identified as having a disabled member are then asked if their medical condition/disability means their accommodation requires special adaptations, and if their accommodation is suitable for their needs. Data covers England.

Data Source: Survey of English Housing

Published: 03 December 2009

G2 – The percentage of households living in non-decent accommodation

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year 2005 – Figures from 2007 show that 32.9% of households with a disabled person live in non-decent accommodation, compared to 34.6% of households with no disabled person. This difference is not statistically significant. These figures cannot be compared to the 2005 baseline for the reasons outlined below.

Disabled Non disabled
2003 33.1% 29.2%
2004 30.0% 27.8%
2005 28.6% 25.9%
2006 27.3% 25.4%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled
Disabled Non disabled
2006* 34.1% 34.6%
2007 32.9% 34.6%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

*(from this point, we are using an updated decent homes definition)

Definition: Decent homes figures up to 2006 are based on the original definition, which included the Fitness Standard as one of four criteria for assessing decency (the others being a satisfactory state of repair, modern facilities and services and an adequate level of thermal comfort). In 2006, the statutory Fitness Standard was replaced by the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) Information was collected through the survey on both Fitness and the HHSRS for 2006 to enable the impact of the change in the definition of decent homes to be assessed. From 2006, reporting of decent homes uses the updated definition (incorporating the HHSRS rather than the Fitness Standard). Homes posing a Category 1 hazard under the HHSRS are considered non-decent from April 2006. Disability is identified by anyone in the household having a long term illness or disability. Data covers England.

Data Source: English House Condition Survey

Published: 08 December 2009

G3 – Satisfaction of both home and neighbourhood

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2008. Figures from 2008 show that 82 per cent of disabled people aged 65 and over were satisfied with both their home and neighbourhood compared to 87 per cent of non disabled people aged 65 and over.

Disabled Non disabled
2008 82% 87%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

Definition: Data covers people aged 65 and over who report that they are fairly satisfied or very satisfied to both of the following questions:

  1. How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your local area as a place to live?
  2. How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your home as a place to live?

‘Local Area’ is defined as the area within 15-20 minutes walking distance from your home. Disabled respondents are defined as those respondents who say they have any long standing illness, disability or infirmity (long standing means anything that has troubled you over a period of time or that is likely to affect you over a period of time). Data is for England.

The Place Survey is designed to be carried out by local authorities to collect information about local resident’s perceptions of their local area and the local services they receive. It is a postal (self-completion) survey. Postal surveys, whereby the respondent completes the questionnaire without assistance from a survey interviewer, are much less costly to carry out compared with face-to-face surveys. However, postal surveys can present greater challenges in terms of accurately measuring the views of particularly hard-to-reach groups, such as disabled residents.

Note: This indicator mirrors National Indicator No.138, which is part of the “New Performance Framework for Local Authorities and Local Authority partnerships: Single Set of National Indicators”.

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): This indicator is used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy.

Data Source: Place Survey

Published: 19 July 2010

H1 – Risk of being a victim of crime

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2004/05. Figures from 2008/09 show that disabled people are significantly more likely to be victims of crime than non disabled people. This gap is largest amongst 16-34 year olds (10 percentage points), and is statistically significant amongst all age groups. The only statistically significant change since the baseline is a decrease in the risk of crime for non disabled people aged 65 and over from 10 per cent to 9 per cent.

Disabled Non disabled
2004/05 16-34 39% 32%
35-54 32% 25%
55-64 20% 17%
65+ 10% 10%
2005/06 16-34 36% 31%
35-54 32% 26%
55-64 21% 17%
65+ 11% 10%
2006/07 16-34 44% 33%
35-54 31% 26%
55-64 22% 18%
65+ 11% 10%
2007/08 16-34 37% 31%
35-54 28% 23%
55-64 21% 15%
65+ 11% 9%
2008/09 16-34 42% 32%
35-54 30% 24%
55-64 20% 17%
65+ 11% 9%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

Definition: Disabled people are defined as respondents who report a disability or limiting long-term illness; non disabled people are those who do not report a disability or long-term illness, as well as those who report a non-limiting disability or long-term illness. Data covers England and Wales.

Data Source: British Crime Survey

Published: 03 December 2009

H2 – Confidence in the Criminal Justice System

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2007/08. Figures from 2008/09 show that young disabled people are less likely than their non disabled peers to think the Criminal Justice System (CJS) is effective, with the gap being largest amongst 16-34 year olds (9 percentage points). The gap between disabled and non disabled people aged 35-54 is also statistically significant.

Disabled people are also less likely than non disabled people to think the CJS is fair. The gap in perceived fairness is highest amongst 16-34 year olds (11 percentage points), and remains significant amongst all age bands considered. The only statistically significant change since the baseline is the increase in the proportion of non disabled people aged 35-54 believing that the CJS is fair (53 per cent to 56 per cent)*.

Both indicators suggest that disabled people are less likely to be confident in the CJS than non disabled people, and that this gap broadly decreases with age.

2007/08 2008/09
16-34 35-54 55-64 65+ 16-34 35-54 55-64 65+
Disabled 33% 30% 26% 34% 39% 30% 29% 35%
Non disabled 48% 33% 33% 35% 48% 35% 31% 36%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled
2007/08 2008/09
16-34 35-54 55-64 65+ 16-34 35-54 55-64 65+
Disabled 46% 44% 42% 56% 53% 49% 47% 55%
Non disabled 62% 53% 55% 60% 64% 56% 57% 60%
  1. Disabled
  2. Non disabled

Definition: Disabled people are defined as respondents who report a disability or limiting long-term illness; non disabled people are those who do not report a disability or long-term illness, as well as those who report a non-limiting disability or long-term illness. Data covers England and Wales.

* Note: The smaller sample size for the 2007/08 survey means that statistically significant changes are less likely to be detected. This was due to the introduction of questions mid-year in October 2007

Data Source: British Crime Survey

Published: 03 December 2009

I1 – Disabled people’s perception of the choice and control they have over their lives

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2008. Figures from 2009 show that 22 per cent of disabled people believe that they do not frequently have choice and control over their lives. These figures have not significantly changed since the baseline.

Percentage of the disabled population
2008 23%
2009 22%
  1. Percentage of the disabled population

Definition: The above figure covers all respondents who are currently disabled or have been disabled in the past according to the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA). Respondents regarded as not frequently having choice and control over their lives did not answer “often” or “always” to the following question: “Thinking about your current situation, overall, how often would you say you have choice and control in your life to live your life the way you want to?”. Data aggregates 8 monthly waves of the survey run in each year and covers individuals in private households aged 16 and over in Great Britain.

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): This indicator is used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy, which covers England only. Data for England shows that between 2008 and 2009, the percentage of disabled people that report that they do not frequently have choice and control over their lives has decreased from 23 per cent to 22 per cent. These figures have not significantly changed since the baseline.

Data Source: ONS Opinions Survey

Published: 28 January 2010

I2 – People with long-term conditions supported to be independent and in control of their condition

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2007/08. Figures from 2009/10 show that 81 per cent of people with a long-term condition reported that they had sufficient support from local services or organisations to help manage their long-term health condition(s).

Percentage of people with long-term conditions supported to be independent and in control of their condition
2007/08 74%
2009/10 81%
  1. Percentage of people with long-term conditions supported to be independent and in control of their condition

Definition: Respondents who were supported to be independent and in control of their condition and answered ‘Yes’ to the following question: “In the last 12 months, have you had enough support from local services or organisations to help you to manage your long-term health condition(s)?”. Respondents who define themselves as having one or more long-term conditions, answered ‘Yes’ to the following question: “Do you have any of the following long-standing conditions? – Deafness or severe hearing impairment; blindness or partially sighted; a long-standing physical condition; a learning disability; a mental health condition; a long-standing illness, such as cancer, HIV, diabetes, chronic heart disease or epilepsy”. Data covers England.

Note: This indicator mirrors National Indicator No. 124, which is part of the “New Performance Framework for Local Authorities and Local Authority partnerships: Single Set of National Indicators”.

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): This indicator is used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy.

Data Sources: Healthcare Commission Primary Care Trusts Patient Survey 2007-08 and GP patient survey (DH/Ipos-MORI) 2009-10

Published: 19 July 2010

I3 – Older people receiving the support to live independently

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2008. Figures from 2008 show that 30 per cent of the general population believe older people in their local area receive the support they need to live independently at home for as long as they want to.

Percentage of older people receiving the support to live independently
2008 30%
  1. Percentage of older people receiving the support to live independently

Definition: The figure above is based on responses to the following question:

  • In your opinion, are older people in your local area able to get the services and support they need to continue to live at home for as long as they want to? (This could include help or support from public, private or voluntary services or from family, friends and the wider community).

Disabled respondents are defined as those respondents who say they have any long standing illness, disability or infirmity (long standing means anything that has troubled you over a period of time or that is likely to affect you over a period of time). Data is for England.

The Place Survey is designed to be carried out by local authorities to collect information about local resident’s perceptions of their local area and the local services they receive. It is a postal (self-completion) survey. Postal surveys, whereby the respondent completes the questionnaire without assistance from a survey interviewer, are much less costly to carry out compared with face-to-face surveys. However, postal surveys can present greater challenges in terms of accurately measuring the views of particularly hard-to-reach groups, such as disabled residents.

Note: This indicator mirrors National Indicator No.139, which is part of the “New Performance Framework for Local Authorities and Local Authority partnerships: Single Set of National Indicators”.

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): This indicator is used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy.

Data Source: Place Survey

Published: 19 July 2010

I4 – Take-up of direct payments

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2008/09. Figures from 2008/09 show that 13.8 per cent of adults with a physical disability received direct payments compared to 13.1 per cent of adults with a learning disability and 3.2 per cent of adults with a mental health condition.

2008/09
Adults with a physical disability 13.8%
Adults with a learning disability 13.1%
Adults with a mental health condition 3.2%
  1. Adults with a physical disability
  2. Adults with a learning disability
  3. Adults with a mental health condition

Definition: The figures above reflect the proportion of clients aged 18-64 receiving social care through a direct payment as a percentage of the total number of clients receiving community based services in that client group in the year to 31st March. A client may appear in only one primary client type. Primary client types are based on professional decisions centred on the client’s circumstances, and are not solely an administrative categorisation for the purposes of allocation to a particular specialist team. In some Councils with Adult Social Services Responsibilities (CASSRs), each client has an overarching client classification, but may receive a different classification for a specific assessment. Direct payments are monetary payments made to individuals who have been assessed as needing services, in lieu of social service provisions. Data covers England. Further information on national indicator definitions are available from the Audit Commission website.

Note: This indicator mirrors National Indicator No. 130, which is part of the “New Performance Framework for Local Authorities and Local Authority partnerships: Single Set of National Indicators”. For more information please refer to the Communities and Local Government website.

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): This indicator is also used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy, for which the baseline is 2008/09.

Data Source: NHS Information Centre

Published: 16 June 2010

I5 – People supported to live independently through social services

Baseline and Trends: Baseline year – 2008/09. Figures from 2008/09 show that 540 adults with a physical disability per 100,000 of the population were supported to live independently through social services compared to 339 adults with a learning disability per 100,000 of the population and 557 adults with a mental health condition per 100,000 of the population.

2008/09
Adults with a physical disability (per 100,000 of the population) 540
Adults with a learning disability (per 100,000 of the population) 339
Adults with a mental health condition (per 100,000 of the population) 557
  1. Adults with a physical disability (per 100,000 of the population)
  2. Adults with a learning disability (per 100,000 of the population)
  3. Adults with a mental health condition (per 100,000 of the population)

Definition: The figures above reflect the number of adults aged 18-64 per 100,000 population that are assisted directly through social services assessed/care planned, funded support to live independently, plus those supported through organisations that receive social services grant funded services. A client may appear in only one primary client type. Primary client types are based on professional decisions centred on the client’s circumstances, and are not solely an administrative categorisation for the purposes of allocation to a particular specialist team. In some Councils with Adult Social Services Responsibilities (CASSRs), each client has an overarching client classification, but may receive a different classification for a specific assessment. However, there is the potential for double counting between assessed services and grant funded services but including this latter group gives a broader picture of the overall level of services which are supporting people to live independently. The latest available estimate of double counting between council provided services and grant funded services is 10%. There is also the potential for double counting between grant funded organisations but there is no estimate available for this. Data covers England. Further information on national indicator definitions are available from the Audit Commission website.

Note: This indicator mirrors National Indicator No. 136, which is part of the “New Performance Framework for Local Authorities and Local Authority partnerships: Single Set of National Indicators”. For more information please refer to the Communities and Local Government website.

Independent Living Strategy (ILS): This indicator is also used to monitor the Independent Living Strategy, for which the baseline is 2008/09.

Data Source: NHS Information Centre

Published: 16 June 2010

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s