Identifying Areas of Multiple Social Need: A Case Study in the Preparation of Children Services Plans

Massimo Craglia, Robert Haining and Paola Signoretta
Additional contact information
Massimo Craglia: Sheffield Centre for Geographic Information and Spatial Analysis, Department of Town and Regional Planning, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2TN, England
Robert Haining: Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, Downing Place, Cambridge CB2 3EN, England
Paola Signoretta: Sheffield Centre for Geographic Information and Spatial Analysis, Department of Town and Regional Planning, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2TN, England

Environment and Planning C, 2003, vol. 21, issue 2, 259-276

Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to compare two methods for the identification of priority areas for intervention and funding based on quantifiable assessments of multiple social need. This is an increasingly important aspect of evidence-based policy in a range of social programmes both in Britain, and in other countries. The context within which this methodology is assessed is the preparation of multiannual plans for the provision of services to children and young people. This is a statutory requirement in Britain on all local authorities, and is based on the Children Act 1989. The first method develops a composite indicator in which areas are scored on several variables, and the scores combined to identify those areas that are consistently high across all variables. The advantage of this method lies in its arithmetic transparency, which makes it ideal for use by local authorities and agencies engaged in needs assessment and planning. The potential drawback is that this composite indicator disregards any spatial structure in the data and gives no measure of statistical significance. The second method identifies statistically significant clusters using the exploratory technique of Besag and Newell for cluster detection in rare events. Clusters are combined to identify those areas affected by multiple problems. As shown in the paper, the two methods produce similar patterns of social need which is reassuring from a policy perspective as a large number of areas are now requiring a multiagency ‘joined-up’ approach for needs assessment, targeting intervention, and monitoring outcomes. The findings of this paper will be of relevance to researchers and practitioners.

Date: 2003
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/c0229 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:envirc:v:21:y:2003:i:2:p:259-276

DOI: 10.1068/c0229

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Environment and Planning C
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().