A Strategy for Neighbourhood - test..

People & Place

A Strategy for Neighbourhood

Renewal

Mid–Term Review

1

CONTENTS

Executive Summary 2

List of Tables and Figures 9

Section 1 Neighbourhood Renewal and the Mid–Term Review 12

1.1 Introduction

1.2 The 36 Neighbourhood Renewal Areas

1.3 The Neighbourhood Renewal Programme

Section 2 The Baseline Position 31

2.1 The Baseline Position

2.2 Baseline Measure 1 Relative Deprivation

2.3 Baseline Measure 2 Census 2001 and Official Statistics

2.4 Baseline Measure 3 Original Research

Section 3 Expenditure 45

3.1 Inputs - Expenditure in Neighbourhoods

Section 4 Outputs 48

4.1 Outputs

4.2 Output Monitoring

4.3 Monitoring Systems

4.4 Funding and Outputs Case Study

Section 5 Outcomes 56

5.1 Outcomes

5.2 Demography

5.3 Community Renewal

5.4 Economic Renewal

5.5 Social Renewal Education

5.6 Social Renewal Health

5.7 Social Renewal Crime

5.8 Physical Renewal and Anti-Social Behaviour

Section 6 Committee for Social Development 119

6.1 Report on the Implementation of Neighbourhood Renewal

Section 7 Learning from Elsewhere in the United Kingdom 120

7.1 Transfer of Learning

7.2 The New Deal for Communities Evaluation and Implications

for the Neighbourhood Renewal Agenda

Section 8 Discussion, Recommendations and Conclusions 131

8.1 Discussion and Recommendations - Introduction

8.2 Community Renewal

8.3 Economic and Social Renewal

8.4 Physical Renewal

8.5 Future Prospects for the Strategy

8.6 The Neighbourhood Renewal Experience – A Summary

Assessment

Appendices

Appendix A Independent Assessment of the Conduct of the Mid-term

Review

148

Appendix B Social Development Committee Report Recommendations 150

Appendix C Reference Section 7 158

2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction

In June 2003, Government launched “People and Place – A Strategy for Neighbourhood

Renewal”. This long term (7 – 10 year) Strategy targets those communities throughout Northern

Ireland suffering the highest levels of deprivation. Neighbourhood Renewal is a cross

government Strategy and aims to bring together the work of all Government Departments in

partnership with local people to tackle disadvantage and deprivation in all aspects of everyday

life.

Government has stated its commitment to tackling poverty and social inequalities. This

commitment to address the deprivation experienced by individuals, areas and groups is manifest

in a range of government policies and programmes. Where people live is a major determinant of

their risk of experiencing poverty. Areas can be identified in which concentrations of persons

experiencing high levels of multiple deprivation reside. These Neighbourhoods have reached

their current position because of a combination of factors. No matter where a deprived area is it

will inherently have similar problems. Higher than average rates of unemployment, physical and

mental ill health and crime, lower levels of literacy and numeracy, educational attainment and

participation, problems with quality and maintenance of the environment are just a few. The

concentration of these problems into relatively small geographical areas permits the design and

implementation of interventions to address problems of both individuals and place.

The purpose of the Neighbourhood Renewal Programme is to reduce the social and economic

inequalities which characterise the most deprived areas. It does so by making a long term

commitment to communities to work in partnership with them to identify and prioritise needs and

co-ordinate interventions designed to address the underlying causes of poverty. The

Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy builds on previous spatial regeneration programmes and the

lessons learnt. These include:

• Departments working at cross-purposes on problems that required a joined up response.

• Too much reliance on short term regeneration measures.

• Failure of mainstream public services in areas.

• Too little attention paid to the problems of worklessness, crime and poor education and health

services.

• A failure to harness the knowledge and energy of local people.

• A lack of leadership.

• Failure to spread knowledge of what works and to encourage innovation.

A number of commitments were made in the Strategy. The Department indicated that a mid-term

review of the Strategy would be carried out, which would consider the overall impact of the

Strategy for those who reside in the Neighbourhood Renewal Areas. The mid-term review is

effectively an interim evaluation of the policy to date. The review will be important for determining

the extent to which the Neighbourhood Renewal policy has met or is meeting its objectives and

that those intended to benefit have done so.

The Terms of Reference of the mid-term review are summarised below. The review would:

3

• Be consistent with the principles of policy evaluation as outlined in the ‘Magenta Book’ and

will seek to determine the extent to which a Neighbourhood Renewal Area has met or is

meeting its objectives and that those intended to benefit have done so.

• Use a range of research methods to systematically investigate the effectiveness of

Neighbourhood Renewal interventions, implementation and processes, and to determine their

merit, worth, or value in terms of improving the social and economic conditions of different

stakeholders.

• Adopt a summative evaluation (sometimes called impact evaluation) approach which asks

questions about the impact of a policy, programme or intervention on specific outcomes and

for different groups of people. The review will ask if the goals of the programme are being

achieved.

• Review and consider the transfer of learning from evaluations of neighbourhood interventions

from other regions of the United Kingdom.

• Consider the implications of the review for policy and practice in this area.

• Invite a peer review of the analysis and conclusions drawn.

2008/09 marked the approximate mid-way point for the Neighbourhood Renewal Programme and

as such was an appropriate time to; reflect on progress to date and what actions are required to

fine tune the delivery of the programme.

The four strategic objectives underpinning the Strategy are: Community Renewal, Economic

Renewal, Social Renewal and Physical Renewal. Using all the available evidence the mid-term

review reports progress in relation to each of these objectives. Two caveats are made:

• This is a Programme wide review based on 36 neighbourhoods with separate narratives;

conclusions will not apply to all neighbourhoods or partnerships in each and every instance.

• It is important at this interim stage to be both realistic about what the Programme has, or

might have achieved. There are 36 deprived areas, many of which have endured decades of

economic decline, social dislocation, deteriorating service delivery, and political

marginalisation: change was never going to occur overnight.

Measuring Impact

The problems of these areas are deeply embedded. They have grown up over a long period, and

have affected people’s sense of identity and confidence, their attitudes and interactions with

others, as well as more tangible outcomes. The problems of these areas are not going to be

resolved in a few years by general economic recovery and/or area-based interventions.

Sustained investment is needed (along with a functioning economy) to effect change.

It is important to distinguish between relative change and absolute change when considering

impact. The latest multiple deprivation measures (NIMDM 2010) report limited mobility in terms

of the relative ranks of areas. That does not mean however that there has not been positive

change in the absolute position of neighbourhoods across a range of social and economic

indicators. The main aim of the programme is to reduce the gap between the most deprived

neighbourhoods and the rest of the country. Where possible statistical indicators have been used

to establish the baseline position in the neighbourhoods and to monitor trends over time.

4

Community Renewal

Community Renewal remains one of the central strategic objectives for the Programme. There

are advantages for individuals, households and communities which can flow from close

engagement between Partnerships and local communities. Engagement can occur in various

guises: consultation, involvement in projects and strategies, residents being members of

Partnerships, and so on. Partnerships have collectively done much to raise aspirations and

confidence in their areas. They have helped individuals, households and communities begin the

process of moving from long term disaffection to engagement with the mainstream.

At this stage, evidence from across the Programme is nevertheless not entirely comforting in

relation to community engagement/renewal. Reviewing progress in relation to the Community

Renewal objectives has been difficult not least because of the lack of any clear definition or

quantifiable baseline position. It is possible to quantify inputs and list activities which are

construed as having a community development dimension (in terms of promoting the activities

above) but there are no quantifiable outcomes per se. Anecdotally, activities, the formulation or

integration of partnerships, community consultations, the publication of Vision Statements and

Action Plans can all be put forward as evidence of the “development of confident communities

that are able and committed to improving the quality of life in their areas”. There remains a need

to clarify outcomes in relation to this objective.

Whilst attempts have been made to measure community capacity/capital/cohesion etc there is not

yet any accepted quantifiable indicator available.

Economic and Social Renewal

A number of measures were used to chart progress across a range of economic and social

indicators. It should be noted that the overall trends described are not necessarily reflected in

each of the 36 areas.

Demography

Between 2001 and 2008 the population of the Neighbourhood Renewal Areas fell by 0.9% whilst

the Northern Ireland population increased by 5.1%.

Worklessness

Much of the data pertaining to the degree of worklessness in Neighbourhood Renewal Areas is

derived from the Census of Population 2001. It will not be possible to measure change on these

indicators until the results of the 2011 Census become available.

Between 2001 and 2007 there was a substantial increase in the number of employee jobs in

Neighbourhood Renewal Areas (+25,553). A 14% increase compared to 8% in the rest of the

country.

The number of Neighbourhood Renewal Areas residents claiming JSA and IS fell from just over

11, 000 to 8,300 and 42,000 to 39,000.

Economic inactivity due to ill health remains a problem. Numbers on DLA have remained

consistently high (approximately 50,000). The overall picture remains one of comparatively

higher levels of unemployment and economic inactivity than the population as a whole.

Education

Improvements were recorded across the range of educational outcomes.

5

The percentage of schools leavers with no GCSEs has fallen from 13.1% to 6.7%. The gap

between Neighbourhood Renewal Areas and the rest of NI has closed from 9.1 percentage points

to 3.6.

The percentage of pupils achieving the expected level for English and Maths at Key Stage 2 has

improved. Between 2004/05 and 2007/08 for Maths the percentage increased from 67.7% to

71.4% (gap closed from 14.1 to 11.5 percentage points) and for English 64.4% to 70.1% (gap

closed from 15.2 to 10.8 percentage points).

The percentage of pupils achieving 5+ GCSEs grades A*-C increased from 2003/04 to 2007/08

from 39.8% to 48.3% (gap closed from 25.5 to 22.1 percentage points).

Health

The proportion of people in Neighbourhoods dying prematurely (under 75) has improved slightly,

by 1% between 2005 and 2008. Life expectancy for both males and females has also risen by a

small amount.

Suicide rates have increased significantly from 16.2 (per 100,000) to 24.0 between 1999/03 and

2004/08. The rate is twice that of the rest of the country.

Births to teenage mothers 13-16 and 13-19 have decreased between 2001 and 2008.

Crime and Anti-social Behaviour

The overall crime rate and particular types of crime have fallen between 2003/04 to 2007/08

across the Neighbourhood Renewal Areas.

Data on anti-social behaviour incidents has only recently become available. While there is

insufficient data to describe a trend it is notable that between 2007 and 2008 there were over

10,000 less incidents recorded (73,360 to 62,734).

Table 1 below provides a summary of the baseline and review position in relation to the main

social and economic indicators. It also provides were possible an indication of the movement on

the indicator. Updated information on a number of baseline indicators will not be available until

the results of the 2011 Census of Population are published.

6

Summary of Key Socio-Economic Indicators

Key Outcome Areas Baseline Review Position Change on

indicator

Demography

Population 277,770 275,354 -2416 (-0.9%)

Worklessness

Employee Jobs (n)

Job Seekers Allowance (n)

Disability Living Allowance (n)

Income Support (n)

%Long Term Illness (Census)

% Unemployed (Census)

% Long Term Unemployed (Census)

% Economically Active (Census)

% Economically Inactive (Census)

185421

11011

44464

41825

35.6

8.1

46.6

49.7

50.3

210974

8314

48374

38873

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

+25553 (14%)

-2697 (25%)

+3910 (9%)

-2952 (-7%)

Education

% Key Stage 2 Level 4 English

% Key Stage 2 Level 4 Maths

% Achieving 5+ GCSE’s A*-C inc equiv

% School Leavers No GCSE’s

64.4

67.7

39.8

13.1

70.1

71.4

48.7

6.7

+5.7

+3.7

+8.9

+6.4

Health

Life Expectancy Males

Life Expectancy Females

% Deaths Under 75

Births to Teenage Mothers 13-16 (per 1,000)

Births to Teenage Mothers 13-19 (per 1,000)

Suicide Rates Males

Suicide Rates Female

71

78

48

7.1

35.6

26.6

6.9

71

78

47

6.5

31.8

38.9

10.5

0

0

-1

-0.6

-3.8

+12.3

+3.6

Crime

Overall Crime Rate

Burglary Rate

Thefts Rate

Violent Crime Rate

Anti-Social Behaviour (n)

144.1

12.6

42.4

41.6

73360

134.8

10.9

33

44.6

62734

-9.3

-1.7

-9.4

+3

-10626

Physical Renewal

The Programme set out to help create attractive, safe, sustainable environments in the most

deprived neighbourhoods. There is no readily available baseline on which to base a comparison

so the evidence base comprises of tangible improvements in relation to a broad range of physical

developments in the areas. There is ample evidence of the benefits accrued through

neighbourhood renewal investment. Examples include: sports facilities, childcare facilities, street

lighting, community centres, business units, tree planting and play parks.

Conclusions and Recommendations

A number of conclusions have been drawn from the evidence which form the basis of

recommendations. These are summarised below:

Summary of Conclusions

• Whilst there has been some narrowing of the gap between the Neighbourhood Renewal

Areas and the rest of Northern Ireland on a range of the outcome indicators the areas remain

some way behind in both relative and absolute terms.

• The Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy has laid many of the foundations necessary for future

action.

7

• There is no single ‘model’ of a Neighbourhood Renewal Area.

• There are concerns that the scale (population size) of some neighbourhoods does not

facilitate a partnership led Programme approach and an alternative form of intervention

should be sought.

• Place based outcomes have been easy to realise and in the early stages provided quick wins.

People based outcomes take longer to achieve but should form the basis of an outcome

driven programme.

• There are concerns about the ability to assess the impact of programmes.

• There is no evidence base of interventions which inform Partnerships how to move from

baseline to outcomes.

• There is no consistent output monitoring of activities or sharing of PPEs.

• There remain difficulties in attributing reasons for success.

• Given the scale of problems still remaining in the most deprived areas, the regeneration

programmes will not be enough on their own to achieve significant change.

• The biggest changes to the levels of poverty in the most disadvantaged areas will come from

mainstream programmes.

Summary of Recommendations

• There should be a renewed acknowledgement that neighbourhood regeneration is a longterm

objective.

• Regeneration policies cannot be developed and implemented in a vacuum – they need to be

linked with wider policies operating at a broader spatial scale – particularly in the area of

economic development.

• A continuing/stronger emphasis on worklessness is justified, though this needs to be

addressed by interventions that also target broader barriers.

• Neighbourhood Action Plans should be reviewed to ensure that connections are made

between areas of need and areas of opportunity.

• A common set of project output indicators should be agreed for Neighbourhood Renewal

Investment Fund supported projects.

• An annual report on expenditure, project activity and progress against outcome measures for

each Neighbourhood Renewal Area should be published by Development Offices.

• A greater emphasis should be placed on setting and monitoring progress against targets at

the individual neighbourhood level.

• Training on NINIS should be included in the induction of all new staff.

• Agreement is required of who funds what.

8

• Neighbourhood Renewal Investment Funds must be targeted on interventions for which

Department for Social Development has responsibility to ensure resources not spread too

thinly.

• Move towards programmes and away from one off projects.

• Develop new models of delivery which bring together regeneration resources and mainstream

spending in a more complementary way.

• Projects which do not display the ability to contribute to agreed outcomes should not continue

to be supported and more effective methods of achieving outcomes should be found.

• Regeneration success should be measured by the outcomes that it delivers (not activities)

with a priority focus on improving economic outcomes.

• Move towards outcome focused planning.

• Maintain support from and a full engagement with the people and the communities involved.

• There should be a greater emphasis on self-help (volunteering).

• Performance data at GCSE level should be collected in future to include 5+CGSEs A*-C

including English and Maths to ensure continuity with the Department of Education definition

of Educational Deprivation.

• There is a need to develop a common approach to measuring success throughout all three

Development Offices. A common set of outcome indicators should be agreed and reported on

annually.

• An Action Plan should be developed outlining how the appropriate recommendations

contained in the Mid-term Review and the Committee for Social Development’s Report will be

implemented.

Conduct and Analysis

The Mid-term Review was undertaken by the Neighbourhood Renewal Unit in the Department for

Social Development assisted by the Department’s Analytical Services Unit. In accordance with

the Terms of Reference the conduct and analysis of the review was independently assessed by

Dr Brendan Murtagh, School of Planning, Architecture and Civil Engineering, The Queen’s

University of Belfast. The assessment is provided at Appendix A

9

List of Tables

TABLE DESCRIPTION PAGE

NO

1. The 50 Most Deprived Urban Wards in Northern Ireland 2001 34

2. The 10% Most Deprived Urban Enumeration Districts 35

3. Contributing Ward Composition of Neighbourhood Renewal Areas 37

4. Summary Baseline Position 2003/04 38

5. Neighbourhood Renewal Areas Census Comparisons 42

6. Neighbourhood Renewal Investment Fund Expenditure 2003/04-2008/09 46

7. Neighbourhood Renewal Expenditure per Capita 2003/04-2008/09 47

8. Relative Deprivation Ranks 2001 and 2010 Comparison 58

9. Population Change 2001-2008 61

10. Employee Jobs Summary 63

11. Income Support Claimants Summary 64

12. Income Support Claimants 66

13. Pension Credit Claimants Summary 67

14. Pension Credit Claimants 69

15. Job Seekers Allowance Claimants Summary 70

16. Job Seekers Allowance Claimants 72

17. Disability Living Allowance Claimants Summary 73

18. Disability Living Allowance Claimants 75

19. School Leavers with no GCSE’s Summary 76

20. School Leavers with no GCSE’s 2003/04-2007/08 78

21. Percentage Achieving Key Stage 2 Level 4 Maths Summary 79

22. Percentage Achieving Key Stage 2 Level 4 Maths 82

23. Percentage Achieving Key Stage 2 Level 4 English Summary 83

24. Percentage Achieving Key Stage 2 Level 4 English 85

25. Pupils Attaining 5+ GCSEs A*-C 2003/04-2007/08 Summary 86

26. Pupils Attaining 5+ GCSEs A*-C 2003/04-2007/08 88

27. Total Offences per 1000 Population Summary 89

28. Total Offences per 1000 Population 91

29. Burglaries per 1000 Population Summary 92

30. Burglaries per 1000 Population 94

31. Violent crime per 1000 Population Summary 95

32. Violent crime per 1000 Population 97

33. Thefts per 1000 Population Summary 98

34. Thefts per 1000 Population 100

35. Anti Social Behaviour Incidents Summary 101

36. Anti Social Behaviour Incidents 102

37. Percentage of Deaths Under 75 Summary 103

38. Percentage of Deaths Under 75 105

39. Life Expectancy Summary 106

40. Suicide Rates per 100,000 (1999-2003) Summary 108

41. Crude Suicide Rates per 100,000 110

42. Teenage Births as a Percentage of Total Births Summary 111

43. Teenage Births as a Percentage of Total Births Summary 113

44. Births to Teenage Mothers 13-19 Summary 114

45. Births to Teenage Mothers 13-19 116

46. Summary of Key Socio-Economic Indicators 133

10

List of Figures

FIGURE DESCRIPTION PAGE

NO

1. Components of an Evaluation Plan 15

2. Location of Neighbourhood Renewal Areas 18

3. Population of Neighbourhood Renewal Areas 18

4. Age Profile of Neighbourhood Renewal Areas 19

5. Community Background of Neighbourhood Renewal Areas 20

6. Lone Parent with Children Households in Neighbourhood Renewal Areas 21

7. Lone Pensioner Households in Neighbourhood Renewal Areas 21

8. Working Age persons with a Long Term Illness in Neighbourhood

Renewal Areas

22

9. Working Age Population with No Qualifications in Neighbourhood

Renewal Areas

23

10. Economic Inactivity Rates in Neighbourhood Renewal Areas 23

11. Unemployment Rates in Neighbourhood Renewal Areas 24

12. Identification and Definition of Boundaries of Neighbourhood Renewal

Areas

27

13. The Baseline 31

14. Neighbourhood Renewal Investment Fund Funding Allocated by

Regional Development Office per Year

52

15. Neighbourhood Renewal Investment Fund Allocations by Neighbourhood

Renewal Strategic Objective

52

16. Community Renewal Allocations by Project Type 53

17. Economic Renewal Allocations by Project Type 53

18. Social Renewal Allocations by Project Type 54

19. Physical Renewal Allocations by Project Type 54

20. Revenue/Capital Allocations 55

21. Proportion of Revenue and Capital by Neighbourhood Renewal Areas 55

22 Components of an Evaluation Plan 56

23. Population 2001 – 2008 59

24. Percentage Population Change 2001-2008 60

25. Employee Jobs 63

26. Income Support Claimants 64

27. Income Support Claimants 65

28. Pension Credit Claimants 67

29. Pension Credit Claimants 68

30. Job Seekers Allowance Claimants 70

31. Job Seekers Allowance Claimants 71

32. Disability Living Allowance Claimants 73

33. Disability Living Allowance Claimants 74

34. School Leavers with No GCSEs 76

35. School Leavers with No GCSEs Gap 77

36. Percentage Achieving Key Stage 2 Level 4 Maths 80

37. Percentage Achieving Key Stage 2 Level 4 Maths Gap 81

38. Percentage Achieving Key Stage 2 Level 4 English 83

39. Percentage Achieving Key Stage 2 Level 4 English Gap 84

40. Pupils Attaining 5+ GCSE A* - C 86

41. Percentage Achieving 5+ GCSEs A* - C Gap 87

42. Total Offences Per 1,000 Population 89

43. Total Offences Per 1,000 Population Gap 90

44. Burglaries Per 1,000 Population 92

45. Burglaries Per 1,000 Population Gap 93

46. Violent Crime Per 1,000 Population 95

47. Violent Crime Per 1,000 Population Gap 96

11

48. Thefts Per 1,000 Population 98

49. Thefts Per 1,000 Population Gap 99

50. Anti-Social Behaviour 101

51. Percentage Deaths Under 75 103

52. Percentage Deaths Under 75 Gap 104

53. Life Expectancy Males 106

54. Life Expectancy Females 107

55. Suicide Rates 1999-2003 108

56. Suicide Rates 2004-2008 109

57. Teenage Births as a Percentage of Total Births 111

58. Teenage Births as a Percentage of Total Births Gap 112

59. Births to Teenage Mothers Age 13-16 114

60. Births to Teenage Mothers Age 13-19 115

12

Section 1 Neighbourhood Renewal and the Mid-term Review

1.1 Introduction

The symptoms of deprivation are easy to identify and understand. People who live in deprived

areas are much more likely to be out of work or, when they do have jobs, to be poorly paid. The

economic stresses of unemployment and low incomes are closely linked to social problems such

as poor health, low levels of educational achievement and high levels of crime. Economic

deprivation also leads to environmental problems, characterised by derelict buildings,

undeveloped sites and poor services.

People living in the most deprived neighbourhoods are more likely to depend on public services

than the rest of society: those who are unemployed or who are on low incomes depend on the

benefit system: those with poor health are more likely to need the help of the Health and Personal

Social Services: those suffering from anti-social behaviour are more likely to need the assistance

of the police. Because these neighbourhoods depend more on public services than the rest of

society, they will be disproportionately affected by any weaknesses or under performance in

those services.

In June 2003, Government launched “People and Place – A Strategy for Neighbourhood

Renewal”. This long term (7 – 10 year) Strategy targets those communities throughout Northern

Ireland suffering the highest levels of deprivation. Neighbourhood Renewal is a cross

government Strategy and aims to bring together the work of all Government Departments in

partnership with local people to tackle disadvantage and deprivation in all aspects of everyday

life.

Neighbourhoods in the most deprived 10% of wards across Northern Ireland were identified using

the Noble Multiple Deprivation Measure. Following extensive consultation, this resulted in a total

of 36 areas, and a population of approximately 280,000 (one person in 6 in Northern Ireland),

being targeted for intervention. The areas include:

• 15 neighbourhoods in Belfast,

• 6 neighbourhoods in the North West and

• 15 neighbourhoods in other towns and cities across Northern Ireland.

Neighbourhood Partnerships have been established in each Neighbourhood Renewal Area as a

vehicle for local planning and implementation. Each Neighbourhood Partnership includes

representatives of key political, statutory, voluntary, community and private sector stakeholders.

Together, they have developed long term visions and action plans designed to improve the

quality of life for those living in the area.

A number of commitments were made in the Strategy. The Department indicated that a Mid-term

Review of the Strategy would be carried out, which would consider the overall impact of the

Strategy for those who reside in the Neighbourhood Renewal Areas. This report fulfills that

commitment. In order to facilitate the measurement of the impact of the Strategy the Department

indicated a range of work that would be undertaken in relation to; establishing the baseline

conditions in the areas, putting monitoring systems in place and setting targets.

13

1.1.1 Baseline Information – The Starting Position

The construction of the baseline was to be based on work by the Northern Ireland Statistics and

Research Agency (NISRA) who were in the process of developing a Geographic Information

System of neighbourhood statistics. It would use information from the 2001 Census and a wide

range of administrative statistics on the social, economic and environmental aspects of local life.

When available, this information was to be used to understand the starting situation and monitor

the changes that would result from Neighbourhood Renewal. This data source was to be

supplemented by baseline information developed for each Neighbourhood Renewal Area.

Additional information would be gathered by undertaking "neighbourhood surveys" that would

identify the most pressing issues that concern people from disadvantaged neighbourhoods.

1.1.2 Monitoring Outputs and Outcomes

Meaningful targets were to be agreed within the context of the Neighbourhood Action Plans and

set for every Neighbourhood Renewal Area. The Neighbourhood Partnership Boards would be

responsible for monitoring their own activities and providing information on how they are

performing against their targets to Department for Social Development on a regular basis. The

Department for Social Development would collect data on the results; both outputs and outcomes

achieved in all of its target neighbourhoods, and regularly channel this information to the

Ministerial Group. Annex 3 of the Strategy listed some of the output indicators which were in use

by regeneration programmes in Northern Ireland and which might be used by individual

Neighbourhood Renewal Areas. The list was not viewed as definitive, and alternative or additional

output indicators could be used in individual Neighbourhood Renewal Areas to reflect their

individual circumstances and needs.

As well as knowing what is happening in each individual Neighbourhood Renewal Area, the

overall effect the Neighbourhood Renewal approach is having on tackling deprivation in Northern

Ireland would be measured. Therefore, the Strategy set a number of high level targets for

Neighbourhood Renewal at a regional level that are also germane to an individual area. These

were set out in Annex 4 of the Strategy.

Since the purpose of the Neighbourhood Renewal approach is to tackle deprivation by integrating

the work of all government departments and agencies, as far as possible, the targets taken for

Neighbourhood Renewal were to be taken from those already included in new TSN Action Plans,

Public Service Agreements and Service Delivery Agreements. If additional targets were needed,

these would be agreed by all Departments at the Ministerial Group and included into their

Departments' new TSN Action Plans, Public Service Agreements and Service Delivery

Agreements.

1.1.3 Action Plan Milestones

In order to monitor progress, a series of key milestones would be built into Neighbourhood Action

Plans for each Neighbourhood Renewal Area. These milestones would allow progress against

output and outcomes measures to be determined and also allow information to be gathered on

how formation of structures is going. This latter aspect will be of particular significance early in the

Strategy implementation.

1.1.4 The Mid-term Review

The Mid-term Review is effectively an interim evaluation of the policy to date. The terms

evaluation and review are interchangeable in this context. The review is based on the principles

set out in the Magenta Book. The Magenta Book is a set of guidance notes for policy evaluators

and analysts, and people who use and commission policy evaluation. It has a strong focus on

policy evaluation in Government and is structured to meet the needs of Government analysts and

policy makers.

14

The Mid-term Review will be important for determining the extent to which the Neighbourhood

Renewal policy has met or is meeting its objectives and that those intended to benefit have done

so.

The Terms of Reference of the Mid-term Review are summarised below. The review:

• Will be consistent with the principles of policy evaluation as outlined in the ‘Magenta Book’

and will seek to determine the extent to which Neighbourhood Renewal has met or is meeting

its objectives and that those intended to benefit have done so.

• Will use a range of research methods to systematically investigate the effectiveness of

Neighbourhood Renewal interventions, implementation and processes, and to determine their

merit, worth, or value in terms of improving the social and economic conditions of different

stakeholders.

• Will adopt a summative evaluation (sometimes called impact evaluation) approach which

asks questions about the impact of a policy, programme or intervention on specific outcomes

and for different groups of people. The Review will ask if the goals of the programme are

being achieved.

• Will review and consider the transfer of learning from evaluations of neighbourhood

interventions from other regions of the UK.

• Will consider the implications of the review for policy and practice in this area.

• Will invite a peer review of the analysis and conclusions drawn.

1.1.5 A Summative Evaluation

One type of evaluation that is commonly used in policy evaluation is a summative evaluation.

Summative evaluation (sometimes called impact evaluation) asks questions about the impact of a

policy, programme or intervention on specific outcomes and for different groups of people.

Summative evaluation seeks estimates of the effects of a policy either in terms of what was

expected of it at the outset, or compared with some other intervention, or with doing nothing at all

(i.e. the counterfactual).

It is sometimes important to ask whether or not a policy, programme or project can be evaluated

at all. Some policy initiatives and programmes can be so complicated and diffuse that they have

little prospect of meeting the central requirements of evaluability. These are:

• That the interventions, and the target population, are clear and identifiable.

• That the outcomes are clear, specific and measurable.

• That an appropriate evaluation design can be implemented.

1.1.6 The Performance Measurement Framework

In October 2001, the Department for Social Development appointed Cambridge Economic

Associates to examine existing approaches to the measurement of urban regeneration policy in

Northern Ireland and make recommendations for a performance measurement framework for the

new urban regeneration strategy i.e. Neighbourhood Renewal. The key elements of a

performance measurement framework were identified as being:

15

• The establishment of baseline positions and targeting need and opportunity.

• Establishing a common financial framework that will allow expenditure and leverage to be

assessed.

• Adopting key activity indicators.

• Adopting key output indicators.

• Adopting key outcome indicators.

Figure 1 below is a graphical representation of the various elements of a performance

measurement framework.

Figure 1: Components of an Evaluation Plan

Incomes Housing Educa tion Health Leisure Crime Shopping Other

commercial Transport Community

AApppprraaiissaall ooff o oppttiioonnss

SSeettttiinngg ppoolliiccyy oobbjjeeccttiivveess aanndd ttaarrggeettss

individual

Implementation and management of individual

regeneration projects

MMoonniittoorriinngg ooff eexxppeennddiittuurrees, aacntdiv oiutyt caonmd eosutputs EEvvaalluuaattiioonn ooff sscchheemmee

TThhee B Baasseelliinnee PPoossiittiioonn

AApppprraaiissaal lo off pprroojjeeccttss ffoorr sseelleecctteedd ooppttiioonnss Lessons for improving

the scheme

Lessons for improving

the scheme

CCoonnttrriibbuuttiioonn t too OOuuttccoommeess

Economic

Demographic Activity

Housing Education Health Leisure Crime Shopping Other

commercial

Economic Transport Community

Ac tivity

Demographic Income s

1.1.7 Indicators of Poor Quality of Life

Four specific domains have featured in much of the policy delivery debates across the United

Kingdom and are generally accepted as being the main determinants of poor quality of life.

These are:

• The extent to which the adult population is unemployed, economically inactive and benefit

dependent, in particular focusing on workless households.

• Poor levels of qualifications in the population and those leaving schools.

• Below average standards of health in the community.

• Above average incidence of crime and community fear of crime.

16

If a regeneration initiative is to be successful then it must, over time, bring about real and

sustained improvements in the main outcome domains of improved health, reduced crime and

fear of crime, increased educational standards, raised employment levels (reduced worklessness)

and in addition increase satisfaction with other aspects that affect quality of life such as

community involvement and environmental quality.

1.1.8 Key Outcome Domains

To measure the impact that Neighbourhood Renewal activities have on those things that

determine quality of life it was recommended (by Tyler/Warnock) that the Department for Social

Development adopt key outcome indicators for the following domains at a minimum:

• Work and worklessness.

• Qualifications, skills and training.

• Incomes and benefit dependency.

• Health.

• Educational attainment and attitudes to education, including childcare facilities.

• Crime and safety.

• Community involvement.

• Satisfaction with the area and housing.

1.1.9 Examples of Key Outcome Indicators

Examples then of the type of outcome measurement for these domains might include:

• Number and percentage of population of working age who are registered unemployed,

economically inactive and in workless households.

• Levels of qualifications in the adult population.

• School examination attainment figures.

• Standardised Mortality Rates (by sex and age).

• Number and percentage of disabled, incapacitated and long-term sick.

• Number of recorded crimes and offences per 000 population.

• Percentage who are afraid to go out alone after dark.

Changes on these outcome indicators over time will tell us about the success or otherwise of our

activities and ultimately whether or not we are contributing towards improving the quality of life for

residents of the most deprived areas.

1.1.10 Information Requirements

The main categories of information needed to inform the Mid-term Review are:

17

• Baseline information on the local conditions which Neighbourhood Renewal is seeking to

change. Typical baseline indicators are high unemployment, poor educational attainment,

health indicators and high crime rates.

• Objectives describing the changes in local conditions you are seeking to achieve, and targets

describing the degree of change sought.

• Changes in these local conditions over time.

• Outputs, such as jobs created, training weeks, hectares of open space improved, and

numbers of young people involved in after-school activities.

Cutting across the categories above is the distinction between impacts on local conditions arising

from the outputs of projects (programme outcomes), and impacts which arise from the workings

of the partnerships, (process outcomes). These are the benefits arising from bringing together the

different stakeholders in the area, from their working together, and from community involvement

and empowerment. For example the main outcome of a community centre improvement scheme

might be crime reduction in the area. The process outcome might be the setting up of

neighbourhood watch to secure further improvements.

1.2 The 36 Neighbourhood Renewal Areas (NRAs)

The Neighbourhood Renewal Areas were selected using the Northern Ireland Multiple

Deprivation Measures (MDM) (2001). These measures identify concentrations of deprivation

across Northern Ireland. They describe an area by combining information from seven domains:

Income, Employment, Health, Education, Housing, Access and Social Environment into a single

rank. The areas which were targeted are the neighbourhoods that are within the worst 10% of

urban wards as measured by the MDM and the worst 10% of enumeration districts as measured

by the economic deprivation measure (income and employment).

The 36 Neighbourhood Renewal Areas are distributed throughout Northern Ireland as illustrated

in Figure 2 below. The population of the neighbourhoods selected was approximately 280,000

(2001 Census of Population) or 1 in 6 of the Northern Ireland population.

Whilst the MDM facilitated the selection of the areas it is a relative measure and as such is limited

in its use as a baseline measure and for measuring absolute change in the socio-economic

conditions of the areas over time. The 36 areas, whilst all experiencing high levels of deprivation,

should not be treated as a homogenous group. The areas differ in population size and some key

socio-economic characteristics.

1.2.1 Population

According to the 2001 Northern Ireland Census the resident population of the 36 Neighbourhood

Renewal Areas was 278,000 people or 16% of the Northern Ireland population. The individual

population of the Neighbourhood Renewal Areas varies considerably see Figure 3 below. The

largest area, Inner East Belfast has a population of 21,000 persons compared to 800 in

Dungannon. The average size of Neighbourhood Renewal Areas is 8,000 persons. In Belfast

and the North West the average Neighbourhood Renewal Area size is 10,000 persons compared

to 4,000 in the Regional Development Office area.

18

Figure 2 Location of Neighbourhood Renewal Areas

Figure 3 Population of Neighbourhood Renewal Areas (Thousands)

0

5

10

15

20

25

1. Andersonstown

2. Colin

3. Crumlin/ Ardoyne

4. Falls/ Clonard

5. Greater Shankill

6. Inner East Belfast

7. Inner North Belfast

8. Inner South Belfast

9. Ligoneil

10. Outer West Belfast

11. Rathcoole

12. South West Belfast

13. Tulleycarnet

14. Upper Ardoyne/ Ballysillan

15. Upper Springfield/ Whiterock

16. Limavady

17. Outer North Derry

18. Outer West Derry

19. Strabane

20. Triax Cityside

21. Waterside

22. Armagh

23. Ballyclare

24. Ballymena

25. Bangor

26. Brownlow

27. Coalisland

28. Coleraine Churchlands

29. Coleraine East

30. Downpatrick

31. Dungannon

32. Enniskillen

33. Lurgan

34. Newry

35. Omagh

36. Portadown N. West

1.2.2 Age

Generally the age profiles of the Neighbourhood Renewal Areas mirror those for Northern Ireland

for the under 16, 16 - 59 and over 60 categories. Significant variations exist between the areas

19

with over or under representation of these groups occurring see Figure 4 below. The Colin

Neighbourhood Renewal Areas has a comparatively high percentage of under 16s in its

population, 35.9% compared to 17.2% in Inner South, Belfast. The average across the 36 areas

is 25.8%.

Inner South, Belfast has the highest percentage of 16-59 year olds, 69% compared to 51.9% in

the Greater Shankill area. The average for the 36 areas is 57.3%. The area with the highest

percentage of over 60s is Ballyclare, 27.8% compared to Colin which the is lowest at 7.4%. The

average across the 36 areas is 17.3%.

Figure 4 Age Profile of Neighbourhood Renewal Areas

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Northern Ireland

Non-NRA

All NRA

1. Andersonstown

2. Colin

3. Crumlin/ Ardoyne

4. Falls/ Clonard

5. Greater Shankill

6. Inner East Belfast

7. Inner North Belfast

8. Inner South Belfast

9. Ligoneil

10. Outer West Belfast

11. Rathcoole

12. South West Belfast

13. Tulleycarnet

14. Upper Ardoyne/ Ballysillan

15. Upper Springfield/ Whiterock

16. Limavady

17. Outer North Derry

18. Outer West Derry

19. Strabane

20. Triax Cityside

21. Waterside

22. Armagh

23. Ballyclare

24. Ballymena

25. Bangor

26. Brownlow

27. Coalisland

28. Coleraine Churchlands

29. Coleraine East

30. Downpatrick

31. Dungannon

32. Enniskillen

33. Lurgan

34. Newry

35. Omagh

36. Portadown N. West

Under 16 16-59 Over 60

1.2.3 Community Background

The community background of residents of Neighbourhood Renewal Areas differs significantly

from the population as a whole. Almost two-thirds (63%) of the Neighbourhood Renewal Areas

population come from the Roman Catholic community and one-third (37%) belong to the

Protestant community. The respective figures for the Northern Ireland population are 44% and

53%.

Many of the Neighbourhood Renewal Areas are predominately of one of other community

background. At the opposite ends of the spectrum are Andersonstown (97.9% Catholic) and

Rathcoole (92.6% Protestant). Even in those areas which appear to have significant proportions

from both communities the experience of the ground is one of segregation within the

Neighbourhood Renewal Areas rather than integration e.g. the Short Strand in the Inner East

Belfast Neighbourhood Renewal Area.

20

Figure 5 Community Background of Neighbourhood Renewal Areas

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Northern Ireland

Non-NRA

All NRA

Andersonstown

Colin

Crumlin / Ardoyne

Falls / Clonard

Greater Shankill

Inner East Belfast

Inner North Belfast

Inner South Belfast

Ligoniel

Outer West Belfast

Rathcoole

South West Belfast

Tullycarnet

Upper Ardoyne / Ballysillan

Upper Springfield / Whiterock

Limavady

Outer North Derry

Outer West Derry

Strabane

Triax - Cityside

Waterside

Armagh

Ballyclare

Ballymena

Bangor

Brownlow

Coalisland

Coleraine Churchlands

Coleraine East

Downpatrick

Dungannon

Enniskillen

Lurgan

Newry

Omagh

Portadown N. West

Catholic Protestant

1.2.4 Lone Parent with Children

The Colin Neighbourhood Renewal Area has the highest percentage of households consisting of

a lone parent with children, 29.6% compared to 9.3% in Enniskillen. The average percentage of

lone parents with children across the 36 Neighbourhood Renewal Areas is 17%. This compares

to a non-Neighbourhood Renewal Area figure of 6%

All three Development offices (Belfast Regeneration Office 17.3%, North West Development

Office 16.9% and Regional Development Office 15.2%) are substantially above the overall

Northern Ireland percentage of 8.1%.

21

Figure 6 Lone Parent with Children Households in Neighbourhood Renewal Areas

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Northern Ireland

Non-NRA

All NRA

1. Andersonstown

2. Colin

3. Crumlin/ Ardoyne

4. Falls/ Clonard

5. Greater Shankill

6. Inner East Belfast

7. Inner North Belfast

8. Inner South Belfast

9. Ligoneil

10. Outer West Belfast

11. Rathcoole

12. South West Belfast

13. Tulleycarnet

14. Upper Ardoyne/ Ballysillan

15. Upper Springfield/ Whiterock

16. Limavady

17. Outer North Derry

18. Outer West Derry

19. Strabane

20. Triax Cityside

21. Waterside

22. Armagh

23. Ballyclare

24. Ballymena

25. Bangor

26. Brownlow

27. Coalisland

28. Coleraine Churchlands

29. Coleraine East

30. Downpatrick

31. Dungannon

32. Enniskillen

33. Lurgan

34. Newry

35. Omagh

36. Portadown N. West

1.2.5 Lone Pensioner

The area with the highest percentage of lone pensioner households is Ballyclare, 29% compared

to Outer North Derry which has the lowest at 5.5%. The average percentage of lone pensioners

across the 36 Neighbourhood Renewal Areas is 14.2%

Figure 7 Lone Pensioner Households in Neighbourhood Renewal Areas

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Northern Ireland

Non-NRA

All NRA

1. Andersonstown

2. Colin

3. Crumlin/ Ardoyne

4. Falls/ Clonard

5. Greater Shankill

6. Inner East Belfast

7. Inner North Belfast

8. Inner South Belfast

9. Ligoneil

10. Outer West Belfast

11. Rathcoole

12. South West Belfast

13. Tulleycarnet

14. Upper Ardoyne/ Ballysillan

15. Upper Springfield/ Whiterock

16. Limavady

17. Outer North Derry

18. Outer West Derry

19. Strabane

20. Triax Cityside

21. Waterside

22. Armagh

23. Ballyclare

24. Ballymena

25. Bangor

26. Brownlow

27. Coalisland

28. Coleraine Churchlands

29. Coleraine East

30. Downpatrick

31. Dungannon

32. Enniskillen

33. Lurgan

34. Newry

35. Omagh

36. Portadown N. West

22

1.2.6 Long Term Illness Working age

Upper Springfield/Whiterock has the highest percentage of working age persons with a long term

illness, 30.5% compared to Inner South Belfast which is the lowest at 19.8%.

The average percentage of long-term illness working age persons across the 36 Neighbourhood

Renewal Areas is 25.6% in contrast to the Northern Ireland overall figure of 17.1%

Development Office 54.3% and Regional Development Office 55%) are above the overall

Northern Ireland percentage of 41.6%.

Figure 8 Working Age Persons with a Long-Term Illness in Neighbourhood Renewal Areas

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Northern Ireland

Non-NRA

All NRA

1. Andersonstown

2. Colin

3. Crumlin/ Ardoyne

4. Falls/ Clonard

5. Greater Shankill

6. Inner East Belfast

7. Inner North Belfast

8. Inner South Belfast

9. Ligoneil

10. Outer West Belfast

11. Rathcoole

12. South West Belfast

13. Tulleycarnet

14. Upper Ardoyne/ Ballysillan

15. Upper Springfield/ Whiterock

16. Limavady

17. Outer North Derry

18. Outer West Derry

19. Strabane

20. Triax Cityside

21. Waterside

22. Armagh

23. Ballyclare

24. Ballymena

25. Bangor

26. Brownlow

27. Coalisland

28. Coleraine Churchlands

29. Coleraine East

30. Downpatrick

31. Dungannon

32. Enniskillen

33. Lurgan

34. Newry

35. Omagh

36. Portadown N. West

1.2.7 Working Age Population with No qualifications

Over half, 54.9% of the Neighbourhood Renewal Areas population between the ages of 16 and

74 have no formal educational qualifications. This ranges from the Greater Shankill, at 67.6% to

Inner South Belfast at 19.8%. All three Development Office areas (Belfast Regeneration Office

55.1%, North West

All three Development Offices are above the overall Northern Ireland average of 37.7% - Belfast

Regeneration Office 49.7%, North West Development Office 50.53% and Regional Development

Office 48.1%.

23

Figure 9 Working Age Population with No Qualifications in Neighbourhood Renewal Areas

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Northern Ireland

Non-NRA

All NRA

1. Andersonstown

2. Colin

3. Crumlin/ Ardoyne

4. Falls/ Clonard

5. Greater Shankill

6. Inner East Belfast

7. Inner North Belfast

8. Inner South Belfast

9. Ligoneil

10. Outer West Belfast

11. Rathcoole

12. South West Belfast

13. Tulleycarnet

14. Upper Ardoyne/ Ballysillan

15. Upper Springfield/ Whiterock

16. Limavady

17. Outer North Derry

18. Outer West Derry

19. Strabane

20. Triax Cityside

21. Waterside

22. Armagh

23. Ballyclare

24. Ballymena

25. Bangor

26. Brownlow

27. Coalisland

28. Coleraine Churchlands

29. Coleraine East

30. Downpatrick

31. Dungannon

32. Enniskillen

33. Lurgan

34. Newry

35. Omagh

36. Portadown N. West

1.2.8 Economic Activity/Inactivity

Ballyclare has the highest percentage of economically active persons (59.3%) compared to

Dungannon, 37.8%. The average percentage of economically-active persons across the 36

Neighbourhood Renewal Areas is 50.8%. Consistent with this Ballyclare has the lowest

economic inactivity rate at 40.7% and Dungannon the highest at 62.2%. In total 49.2% of the

Neighbourhood Renewal Area population are economically-inactive.

Figure 10 Economic Inactivity Rates in Neighbourhood Renewal Areas

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Northern Ireland

Non-NRA

All NRA

1. Andersonstown

2. Colin

3. Crumlin/ Ardoyne

4. Falls/ Clonard

5. Greater Shankill

6. Inner East Belfast

7. Inner North Belfast

8. Inner South Belfast

9. Ligoneil

10. Outer West Belfast

11. Rathcoole

12. South West Belfast

13. Tulleycarnet

14. Upper Ardoyne/ Ballysillan

15. Upper Springfield/ Whiterock

16. Limavady

17. Outer North Derry

18. Outer West Derry

19. Strabane

20. Triax Cityside

21. Waterside

22. Armagh

23. Ballyclare

24. Ballymena

25. Bangor

26. Brownlow

27. Coalisland

28. Coleraine Churchlands

29. Coleraine East

30. Downpatrick

31. Dungannon

32. Enniskillen

33. Lurgan

34. Newry

35. Omagh

36. Portadown N. West

24

1.2.9 Unemployment Rates

The highest area of unemployment is Triax Cityside at 10.7% compared to the lowest in

Brownlow at 4.7%. The average percentage of unemployed across the 36 Neighbourhood

Renewal Areas is 7.8%. Triax Cityside also has the highest percentage of long-term unemployed

at 53%. The lowest is Dungannon at 35.1%. The average percentage of long-term unemployed

across the 36 Neighbourhood Renewal Areas is 45.1%.

Figure 11 Unemployment Rates in Neighbourhood Renewal Areas

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

Northern Ireland

Non-NRA

All NRA

1. Andersonstown

2. Colin

3. Crumlin/ Ardoyne

4. Falls/ Clonard

5. Greater Shankill

6. Inner East Belfast

7. Inner North Belfast

8. Inner South Belfast

9. Ligoneil

10. Outer West Belfast

11. Rathcoole

12. South West Belfast

13. Tulleycarnet

14. Upper Ardoyne/ Ballysillan

15. Upper Springfield/ Whiterock

16. Limavady

17. Outer North Derry

18. Outer West Derry

19. Strabane

20. Triax Cityside

21. Waterside

22. Armagh

23. Ballyclare

24. Ballymena

25. Bangor

26. Brownlow

27. Coalisland

28. Coleraine Churchlands

29. Coleraine East

30. Downpatrick

31. Dungannon

32. Enniskillen

33. Lurgan

34. Newry

35. Omagh

36. Portadown N. West

1.3 The Neighbourhood Renewal Programme

In Northern Ireland from the late 1980s, the mechanisms and schemes used to achieve

regeneration objectives ranged from the Laganside Urban Development Corporation model,

Grant-Aid in partnership with the private sector for property development (Urban Development

Grant), Comprehensive Development and Environmental Improvement Schemes, to the more

community-focused Making Belfast Work and Londonderry Regeneration Initiatives. A range of

initiatives, including the Community Regeneration Investment Special Programme (CRISP) had

been introduced to reverse decline in the smaller towns and villages throughout the Province.

The Making Belfast Work and Londonderry Regeneration Initiative aimed to strengthen and target

more effectively the efforts made by the community, the private sector and the Government in

addressing the economic, educational, social, health and environmental problems facing people

living in the most disadvantaged areas.

These measures had some success but shared a weakness in that they tended to be demand-led

and fragmented in response to need.

25

1.3.1 Consultation

In 2001, the Department for Social Development issued a consultation document for

Neighbourhood Renewal. This document set out a new strategic approach to urban regeneration

across Northern Ireland. The Strategy would be aimed at the regeneration of communities

experiencing the most serious economic and social deprivation. Delivery would be co-ordinated

across all Government Departments working in partnership with local communities and key

stakeholders.

The consultation document was widely disseminated, seven regional conferences were held

involving 327 persons, and 48 written responses were received. Academics and the Social

Development Committee of the Northern Ireland Executive were also consulted. The main

messages that emerged from the initial consultation were incorporated into the development of

the Strategy.

A formal Equality Impact Assessment (EQIA) was carried out and consulted upon in early 2003.

The EQIA focused on Section 75 groups contained within the top 10% deprived urban wards at

two levels. The first examined the differential impact on those wards identified for initial inclusion

within the Strategy and others not included. The second looked at the impact of the policy on

Section 75 groups within the wards.

This EQIA was issued to approximately 250 individuals and organisations on the Department for

Social Development Equality Scheme consultation list and those who subsequently expressed an

interest. Publication of the EQIA document was advertised in the media and published on the

Department for Social Development website.

A total of three written responses were received, two of which concerned the absence of detailed

statistical data for the actual Neighbourhood Renewal Areas.

Department for Social Development agreed to make a detailed assessment of equality

implications for the target Neighbourhood Renewal Areas when the area boundaries were

agreed. This meant that equality screening exercises would be built into the implementation

process when Implementation Plans for the Strategy were developed for Belfast, the North West

and other regional towns and cities.

1.3.2 Launch

In June 2003, the “People & Place – A Strategy for Neighbourhood Renewal” document was

launched. Neighbourhood Renewal (NR) Strategies had been undertaken throughout the United

Kingdom and had been targeted at communities suffering the highest levels of deprivation. The

Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy was intended to represent a move away from short-term

project-led interventions (which characterised previous programmes in Northern Ireland) towards

a long-term programme-based approach to tackle deprivation and close the quality of life gap.

Lead responsibility for the Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy in Northern Ireland lay and

continues to lie with the Department for Social Development.

The Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy has 4 objectives:

• Community Renewal – to develop confident communities that are able and committed to

improving the quality of life in the most deprived areas of Northern Ireland.

• Economic Renewal – to develop economic activity in the most deprived neighbourhoods and

connect them to the wider urban economy.

26

• Social Renewal – to improve social conditions for the people who live in the most deprived

neighbourhoods through better co-ordinated public services and the creation of safer

environments.

• Physical Renewal – to help create attractive, safe, sustainable environments in the most

deprived neighbourhoods.

The timescale for the achievement of these targets was indicated as being the duration of the NR

Strategy – 7 to 10 years. The People & Place document also indicated that baseline studies

would be undertaken in each Neighbourhood Renewal Area in order to facilitate the development

of more specific and measurable targets. Progress against these targets was to be reviewed

regularly both for the overall Strategy and for individual Neighbourhood Renewal Areas.

The restoration of devolved Government in Northern Ireland saw revised Public Sector

Agreement (PSA) targets being set. Under PSA 6, the Department for Social Development was

required by 2010 “in conjunction with other Government Departments, agencies and public

bodies, to implement the Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy which aims to close the gap between

the quality of life for people and marginalised groups in the most deprived neighbourhoods and

the quality of life in the rest of Northern Ireland.”

1.3.3 Goals for Neighbourhood Renewal

To help close the gap between the quality of life for people in the most deprived neighbourhoods

and the rest of society, Department for Social Development would pursue two overarching goals:

• To ensure that the people living in the most deprived neighbourhoods have access to the

best possible services and to the opportunities which make for a better quality of life and

better prospects for themselves and their families.

• To improve the environment and image of our most deprived neighbourhoods so that they

become attractive places to live and invest in.

1.3.4 Implementation of the Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy

Following the launch the Department for Social Development (DSD) undertook the

implementation of the Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy, the key aspects of which are described

below.

1.3.5 Selection of Neighbourhood Renewal Areas

In response to feedback from the consultation on the Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy, the

Department elected to target Neighbourhood Renewal resources within the most deprived 10% of

urban areas as measured by the Noble Multiple Deprivation Measures. Again, based on feedback

from the consultation, the Department determined that the Neighbourhood Renewal Areas should

be a workable size; must complement and build upon existing initiatives and must “make sense to

the people who lived in them”. It was further determined that Neighbourhood Renewal Area

boundaries would be finalised following local consultation. To facilitate this process and in

recognition of existing regeneration work, it was determined that projects immediately outside the

Neighbourhood Renewal areas could continue to be supported if they contributed to the needs of

the target area.

Where the most deprived urban wards were contiguous, they were combined into coherent

groupings of more than 1,000 inhabitants. Where the boundaries of the grouping coincided with

an existing initiative, these boundaries were then used to define the Neighbourhood Renewal

Area. Where the boundaries did not coincide with an existing initiative, they were determined

based upon the results of local consultation. Where deprived areas were too small to qualify as

27

Neighbourhood Renewal Areas, the Department agreed to provide funding for these areas Small

Pockets of Deprivation (SPODs) at the same per capita rate.

Through the process described above, 32 Neighbourhood Renewal Areas were established. A

further 4 areas where incorporated following a review of the Noble Measures of Deprivation in

2005.

1.3.6 Identifying Neighbourhood Renewal Areas

Three principles were developed to guide the process for identifying Neighbourhood Renewal

Areas and establishing Neighbourhood Partnership Boards.

• They must be a workable size. The areas had to be large enough to allow integrated

regeneration measures to be developed and to prevent available resources from being

spread too thinly between too many neighbourhoods. At the same time, they must not be so

large that they lose meaning for the people who live there.

• They must make sense to the people who live there. The wards and enumeration districts

used by the Noble Index are administrative boundaries that did not always match up to

people’s perceptions of their neighbourhoods. Therefore, neighbourhood boundaries were to

be agreed through a process of local consultation facilitated by the relevant Development

Offices.

• They must complement and build upon existing initiatives. Neighbourhood Renewal Areas

would be shaped taking account of appropriate area based initiatives already in train.

Examples of some were Peace 2.11 Neighbourhoods, the North Belfast Community Action

Unit, the West Belfast and Shankill Taskforces and the Outer North EPF initiative in

Londonderry.

The Department incorporated the principles in the process detailed in Figure 12 below.

Figure 12 Identification and Definition of Boundaries of Neighbourhood

Renewal Areas

Start with the most deprived urban wards

and Enumeration Districts