Publication, Part of National Child Measurement Programme

National Child Measurement Programme, England 2019/20 School Year

Official statistics, National statistics, Accredited official statistics

Publication Date:: 29 Oct 2020
Geographic Coverage:: England
Geographical Granularity:: Regions, Local Authorities

Part 4: Deprivation

Data quality checks have been undertaken to ensure that the dataset remains representative by Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD). The proportion of children measured in each IMD deciles was compared between 2018/19 and 2019/20 and was very similar in both Reception and Year 6 with maximum of 1.0 percentage points change for children in Reception in the 4^th lowest IMD decile (decile 4), see Table I for more information.

The data quality analyses indicate that the deprivation data presented in this section is comparable with previous NCMP years.

How has deprivation been defined?

Deprivation has been defined using the English Indices of Deprivation, commonly known as the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD). This is the official measure of relative deprivation for Lower Super Output Areas (LSOAs) in England and ranks every LSOA in England from 1 (most deprived area) to 32,844 (least deprived area). Deprivation deciles are calculated by ranking the 32,844 neighbourhoods in England from most deprived to least deprived and dividing them into 10 equal groups. These range from the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods nationally to the least deprived 10% of neighbourhoods nationally.

For further information see: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/english-indices-of-deprivation-2019

For NCMP, we provide deprivation data based on both where the child lives and where the child attends school. Deprivation based on where the child lives is more accurate since sometimes children attend schools in areas with different relative deprivation compared to where they live. Consequently, this report uses the deprivation decile of the child postcode to define deprivation for the current year. However, there were issues with the quality and completeness of the child postcode in the early years of NCMP and therefore, for time series comparisons, the deprivation decile for the school postcode has been used.

Deprivation - Reception

There is a strong relationship between deprivation and obesity.

Obesity prevalence was over twice as high for children living in the most deprived areas (13.3%) than for children living in the least deprived areas (6.0%).

Severe obesity prevalence was almost four times as high for children living in the most deprived areas (3.9%) than for children living in the least deprived areas (1.0%).

In general underweight prevalence decreases as deprivation decreases (not shown on chart).

Deprivation - Year 6

Obesity prevalence was over twice as high for children living in the most deprived areas (27.5%) than for children living the least deprived areas (11.9%).

Severe obesity prevalence was over four times as high for children living in the most deprived areas (7.5% and 1.6% respectively).

Combined overweight and obesity prevalence ranged from 42.0% for children living in the most deprived areas to 24.9% for children living in the least deprived areas (not shown on chart).

For more information: Tables 9 and 10 (deprivation based on postcode of the child), National Child Measurement Programme, England, 2019/20 school year.

Deprivation gap for obesity – Reception

Between 2006/07 and 2019/20 the gap between obesity prevalence for children attending schools in the most and least deprived areas increased by 1.8 percentage points due to obesity prevalence increasing in the most deprived areas and reducing in the least deprived.

Note: Deprivation is based on postcode of the school in the following time series charts as postcode of the child was of poor quality in the early years of the NCMP.

Obesity prevalence for children attending schools in the least deprived areas reduced for boys and remained similar for girls. For children attending schools in the most deprived areas obesity prevalence remained similar for boys but increased for girls.

Deprivation gap for obesity – Year 6

Between 2006/07 and 2019/20 the gap between obesity prevalence for children attending schools in the most and least deprived areas increased by 4.8 percentage points due to obesity prevalence increasing in the most deprived areas and remaining similar in the least deprived.

Obesity prevalence for children attending schools in the least deprived areas increased for boys and remained similar for girls. For children attending schools in the most deprived areas obesity prevalence increased for girls and boys.

For more information: Table 13 (deprivation based on postcode of the school), National Child Measurement Programme, England, 2019/20 school year.

Deprivation gap for severe obesity – Reception

The gap between severe obesity prevalence for children attending schools in the most and least deprived areas increased by 0.5 percentage points.

Severe obesity prevalence for children attending schools in the least deprived areas reduced for boys but remained similar for girls. For children attending schools in the most deprived areas severe obesity prevalence remained similar for boys but increased for girls.

Deprivation gap for severe obesity – Year 6

The gap between severe obesity prevalence for children attending schools in the most and least deprived areas increased by 2.2 percentage points due to prevalence increasing in the most deprived areas and remaining similar in the least deprived.

Severe obesity prevalence for children attending schools in the least deprived areas remained similar for both boys and girls. For children attending schools in the most deprived areas severe obesity prevalence increased for boys and girls.

For more information: Table 14 (deprivation based on postcode of the school), National Child Measurement Programme, England, 2019/20 school year.

Last edited: 28 October 2020 2:52 pm