small that the choice of population base should not have a material effect on relative preferred shares. view is that the whole population aged under ACRA’s 5 should be used to reflect that the aim is to improve the health and well-being of all children aged under 5. There are two options for data on the number of children under 5 the latest – year for which data are available (the mid-year estimates for 2014 ‘actual’ should be available from ONS in summer 2015), or ONS projections for 2016 onwards for each local authority. ACRA propose to use the projected populations as these should be closer to the size of the cohort group in each year. The formula for public health allocations in 2013-14 and 2014-15 for the responsibilities which transferred to local authorities from April 2013 also used population projections. Population churn has also been raised as a possible factor to take into account, as there may be additional costs for new children arriving in an area. ACRA is currently not aware of evidence on the size of such costs. Question 1 : Should the population base be the projected number of under 5 year olds in each local authority? Question 2 : Should population churn be taken into account, and if so what are the higher costs imposed? Relative need per head In addition to universal services, resources for public health for 0-5 children are targeted towards families with higher need and vulnerable first time mothers. ACRA propose that there should be an adjustment for relatively higher need by some families for 0-5 public health services, and that this adjustment children’s is likely to be higher in more deprived areas. ACRA wish to undertake further work on what the adjustment should be. The four issues for an adjustment for relative need per head of the population base are: what measure to use; how to scale the measure; whether the measure should be at small area level to take account of differences in need within as well as between local authorities; what relative weights to assign to those areas for which the measure is higher and lower. ACRA is not aware of any evidence pointing to one particular indicator. The choice of indicator is likely to be a matter of judgement. Options that have been suggested include:
small that the choice of population base should not have a material effect on relative preferred shares. ACRA’s view is that the whole population aged under 5 should be used to reflect that the aim is to improve the health and well-being of all children aged under 5. There are two options for data on the number of children under 5 – the latest year for which ‘actual’ data are available (the mid-year estimates for 2014 should be available from ONS in summer 2015), or ONS projections for 2016 onwards for each local authority. ACRA propose to use the projected populations as these should be closer to the size of the cohort group in each year. The formula for public health allocations in 2013-14 and 2014-15 for the responsibilities which transferred to local authorities from April 2013 also used population projections. Population churn has also been raised as a possible factor to take into account, as there may be additional costs for new children arriving in an area. ACRA is currently not aware of evidence on the size of such costs. Question 1 : Should the population base be the projected number of under 5 year olds in each local authority? Question 2 : Should population churn be taken into account, and if so what are the higher costs imposed? Relative need per head In addition to universal services, resources for public health for 0-5 children are targeted towards families with higher need and vulnerable first time mothers. ACRA propose that there should be an adjustment for relatively higher need by some families for 0-5 children’s public health services, and that this adjustment is likely to be higher in more deprived areas. ACRA wish to undertake further work on what the adjustment should be. The four issues for an adjustment for relative need per head of the population base are: what measure to use; how to scale the measure; whether the measure should be at small area level to take account of differences in need within as well as between local authorities; what relative weights to assign to those areas for which the measure is higher and lower. ACRA is not aware of any evidence pointing to one particular indicator. The choice of indicator is likely to be a matter of judgement. Options that have been suggested include:
public-health-formula-0-5-d8f.docx