1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 The Twice Yearly Count is undertaken in January and July each year, and returns data on the Gypsy/Traveller population living on official Council and Registered Social Landlord ( RSL) sites, private sites and caravans found on unauthorised encampments. The key objective of the Count was to improve understanding of the Gypsy/Traveller population to inform policy and strategy development. Over the period of the Count's operation this has included contributing towards the Equalities agenda, informing decisions on site-related funding, informing housing need assessments and other service provision by local authorities.
1.2 The Scottish Government commissioned Craigforth to review the Twice Yearly Count. Including an assessment of current readership and use of the Twice Yearly Count in light of the original intention for the Count to shape delivery and planning of services for Gypsies/Travellers and to inform policy and strategy development. This also included a requirement to assess the content, quality and robustness of Count data.
Trends in Population and Accommodation Provision
1.3 There has been no consistent upward or downward trend in the total Gypsy/Traveller population over the period of the Count. Although there was a general increase in the population to a peak in summer 2007 which has since reduced during 2008 and 2009.
1.4 The relationship between the summer and winter Gypsy/Traveller population is complex, with winter numbers typically being around two thirds of those reported in the summer. However growth over the period to 2007 was seen in both summer and winter populations suggesting there may be year-round factors influencing population numbers.
1.5 The growth in Gypsy/Traveller population was primarily accommodated by encampment activity. There was significant growth in encampment numbers over the period to 2007, in the context of relatively little change in the private site population and some decrease in the number of usable pitches on official sites. It is not clear the extent to which this growth in encampment activity may reflect an unmet need for permanent site accommodation.
Quality and Accuracy of Count Data
1.6 In relation to the coverage of the Gypsy/Traveller population, the quality and accuracy of Count data relates both to the remit of the Count in excluding some travelling communities and the robustness of Count processes in capturing data. Stakeholders not involved in undertaking the Count tend to conflate these issues, with the result that policy questions around the Count's exclusion of some communities impacts on confidence in the accuracy of Count data.
1.7 In terms of coverage of the population, comparison with alternate population estimates suggests that the Count may only record between a third and a half of the total Gypsy/Traveller population.
1.8 Under-counting if due in very large part to policy decisions to exclude housed Gypsies/Travellers from the Count. There is no robust data available to confirm the size of this population, although anecdotal evidence suggests the population may be very substantial in some areas. However consultation suggests there may be little policy basis for seeking to capture the whole housed Gypsy/Traveller population within the Count.
1.9 Some coverage issues were raised in relation to recording of sites, and particularly in relation to encampments. Despite recent improvements in the robustness of encampment data there remain concerns that the Count does not adequately represent encampment activity. This may reflect resourcing difficulties relating to the need to make a single day estimate of encampments.
1.10 In terms of wider accuracy and robustness concerns, most significant issues related to the extent of inconsistency of approach across local authorities. Local authorities report some variations in how encampment activity in particular is captured for the Count. There were also concerns from those not involved in the Count around variations in the extent to which designated officers had sufficient capacity and knowledge, particularly where officers' role does not have a specific Gypsy/Traveller focus.
1.11 Accuracy issues also emerged in relation to recording of waiting list demand. This was seen as highly relevant to the purpose of the Count, but Gypsies/Travellers and those not involved in the Count suggested data did not provide an accurate account of the scale of demand for official site provision. This reflected variations in how local authorities record and maintain waiting list information, rather than how this is collated for the Count.
Readership and Use of the Count
1.12 Gypsies/Travellers have a continuing relevance to a wide range of policy areas including accommodation needs, wider housing strategy and provision of services such as education, health and social care. Current policy, guidance and service delivery activities suggest a continuing need for robust data on the size and profile of the Gypsy/Traveller population in Scotland.
1.13 There is no immediate prospect of an alternative to the Twice Yearly Count that will provide the frequency and detail of information required. The 2011 Census will provide valuable baseline information, but will not be sufficient to meet policy and service delivery requirements.
1.14 There was a widespread view amongst stakeholders that some degree of modification was required to ensure the Count continued to meet stated objectives. There was some support for moving away from a bi-annual "snapshot" approach, for example to more continuous recording of encampment activity alongside annual or bi-annual counts of more static official and private site provision.
1.15 It was also suggested that the objectives of the Count should be re-shaped to provide more of a focus on measurable outcomes for the Gypsy/Traveller population in relation to accommodation provision and local service delivery. There is likely to be a requirement for the Scottish Government to redefine the remit and specific policy objectives of the Count to ensure an appropriate balance is struck between requirements of agencies, service providers and Gypsies/Travellers.
1.16 A number of specific priorities were identified in terms of improving the operation and content of the Count to ensure it is fit for purpose. The most significant was improving information on encampment activity, although there was considerably scepticism around the feasibility of gathering sufficient detail to inform assessment of accommodation and service needs.
1.17 Current awareness and use of Count outputs varies significantly across stakeholder groups, particularly amongst Gypsies/Travellers. Stakeholder agencies suggested the focus in expanding readership of the Count should be on policy areas where the Count can have greater input - specifically housing strategy and management, and environmental health. However there is some interest amongst Gypsies/Travellers in receiving feedback on Count findings.
1.18 A range of options were identifies in relation to dissemination of Count findings. In terms of communication channels stakeholders recommended making best use of existing networks and linking with appropriate websites, although more direct in-person feedback was recommended for Gypsies/Travellers. Stakeholder agencies also suggested a greater focus on shorter summary reports making clearer the implications of Count findings for specific policy areas.
Recommendations
1.19 We make the following recommendations in relation to three keys aspects of the future operation of the Count.
1.20 In relation to the format, scope and accuracy of Count data…
- A separate count of Gypsies/Travellers in Scotland should continue.
- The Scottish Government should re-assess the policy objectives of the Count to ensure that there is a clear focus to guide administration and production of outputs from the Count.
- The scope of the Count should remain Gypsies/Travellers on official sites, private sites and encampments, and should not include housed Gypsies/Travellers or other travelling communities.
- The Count should move away from a bi-annual exercise to continuous recording of encampment activity by local authorities and an annual Count exercise to gather data on the official and private site population and collate encampment data reported through the year.
- The Scottish Government should consider, in partnership with local agencies involved in undertaking the Count, the most appropriate mechanism for ongoing collection of encampment data.
- The Count is used as a mechanism for sharing good practice in relation to gathering information on private sites.
- The Count is used to assist local authorities in identifying potential data accuracy issues at a local level, and to encourage greater consistency across areas in terms of the systems in place to undertake the Count.
- Reporting of Count findings should give all stakeholders - including local and national agencies, and Gypsies/Travellers - the opportunity to raise concerns around the accuracy of data reported through the Count.
1.21 In relation to maximising the value of data produced by the Count…
- The Scottish Government and local agencies involved in undertaking the Count should work towards gathering information on the profile and travel patterns of Gypsies/ Travellers occupying encampments.
- Consideration should be given to whether and how modification to the collection of data on the Gypsy/Traveller child population could better inform provision of education and other child services.
- Consideration should be given to gathering information on the availability and condition of amenities for official sites.
1.22 In relation to improving Count readership…
- The Scottish Government should establish links with local and national groups within key policy areas where the Count may have a significant role to play.
- Future reporting of Count results should place greater emphasis on providing a high level commentary to aid readers in identifying key trends and issues.
- Reporting should include production of a short summary report highlighting key findings for stakeholder agencies, and separately a short paper suitable for dissemination to Gypsies/ Travellers.
- Dissemination of outputs from the Count should make greater use of existing communication channels.
- A separate and more tailored approach should be taken to ensure that Count results are fed back to Gypsies/Travellers.