OLR 49/04 Appendix Tables Table A3.

1 Perceived level of problems with specific types of behaviour in the local area Table A3.2 Trend in percentage of people perceiving very or fairly big problems with ASB, 1992 to 2003/04 BCS Table A3.3 Perception of trend of ASB in last two years in local area Table A3.4 Percentage perceiving behaviour as biggest problem in local area Table A4.1 Percentage perceiving very or fairly big problems by type of area Table A4.2 Number of types of behaviour seen to be 'very' big problems in the local area by type of area Table A4.3 Percentage perceiving behaviour as biggest problem in local area by type of area Table A4.4 Percentage perceiving behaviour as biggest problem by age group Table A4.5 Percentage perceiving high levels of ASB by local area characteristics Table A4.6 Percentage perceiving high levels of ASB by personal and household characteristics Table A5.1 Stated sources of perceptions of problems for different types of ASB Table A5.2 Stated sources of perceptions of problems with vandalism and graffiti by type of area Table A5.3 Perceptions of problems and personal experience of types of behaviour in last 12 months Table A5.4 Frequency of experience of young people hanging around by type of area Table A5.5 Reporting of incidents among those who experienced them Table A5.6 View of who is responsible for stopping or reducing ASB Table A6.1 The specific nature of ASB incidents on last occasion Table A6.2 Percentage of offenders perceived to be deliberately being anti-social Table A6.3 Percentage of most recent incidents where behaviour was directed towards respondent personally Table A6.4 Frequency of personal experience of ASB in last 12 months Table A6.5 Location of ASB incidents experienced Table A6.6 Timing of incidents experienced Table A6.7 Types of behaviour seen or heard in last 12 months by regular users - town centres Table A6.8 Types of behaviour seen or heard in last 12 months by regular users - public transport Table A7.1 Number of offenders in most recent incident Table A7.2 Gender of offenders Table A7.3 Age of offenders Table A7.4 Ethnicity of offenders Table A7.5 Offender and victim relationship Table A7.6 Whether offenders perceived to be from local area Table A7.7 Relationship between offenders and victim in incidents of drunk or rowdy behaviour Table A7.8 Comparison of age groups of offenders and victims in incidents of young people hanging around Table A7.9 Comparison of ethnicity of offenders and victims in incidents of young people hanging around Table A8.1 Effect of types of ASB on quality of life Table A8.2 Emotional response to ASB problems in the local area Table A8.3 Impact on quality of life of ASB in the local area Table A8.4 Behaviour changes as a result of ASB problems Table A8.5 Percentage for whom young people hanging around has high impact on quality of life - by area characteristics Table A8.6 Percentage for whom young people hanging around had high impact on quality of life - by personal characteristics Table A8.7 Percentage of those perceiving problems in local area for whom ASB had high impact on quality of life - by ASB characteristics Table A8.8 Percentage of those perceiving problems with teenagers hanging around by experience and impact Table A8.9 Percentage worried about crime by level of perceived ASB Table A8.10 Percentage worried about crime by level of perceived problems with vandalism and graffiti Table A8.11 Whether people enjoy living in local area by perception of high ASB Table A8.12 Whether people enjoy living in local area by perceptions of vandalism and graffiti Table A8.13 Crime victimisation rates and high perceived ASB by type of area

Table A3.1 Perceived level of problems with specific types of behaviour in the local area Percentages Very or fairly big problem 43 31 29 29 28 27 25 25 19 15 11 9 7 6 4 3 Very big Fairly big Not a very big Not a problem problem problem problem at all 12 31 34 23 9 22 37 33 9 20 41 30 10 19 34 37 8 20 41 31 9 19 40 33 9 16 33 42 6 18 40 35 5 14 42 39 4 11 30 55 2 9 35 55 3 6 29 62 2 5 26 67 2 4 30 64 1 3 17 79 1 2 13 84 2003/04 BCS
Unweighted n 17,851 17,833 37,874 17,833 37,837 37,836 36,116 17,836 37,685 36,176 17,772 37,879 37,434 17,823 17,597 37,822

Speeding traffic Cars parked inconveniently or illegally Rubbish or litter Fireworks (not part of an organised display) Vandalism and graffiti Teenagers hanging around Drug use or dealing Uncontrolled dogs and dog mess People being drunk or rowdy Abandoned cars People being insulted, pestered or intimidated Noisy neighbours Racial attacks or harassment Disputes between neighbours People using or carrying airguns/ replicas People sleeping rough
1. Base is total population aged 16 or over.

% % % % % % % % % % % % % % % %

Table A3.2 Trend in percentage of people perceiving very or fairly big problems with ASB, 1992 to 2003/04 BCS Percentages Rubbish or litter Vandalism and graffiti Teenagers hanging around Drug use or dealing Drunk or rowdy behaviour Abandoned or burnt-out cars Noisy neighbours Racial attacks 1992 30 26 20 14
n/a n/a

1994 26 29 26 22
n/a n/a

1996 26 24 24 21
n/a n/a

1998 28 26 27 25
n/a n/a

2000 30 32 32 33
n/a

8 3

8 5
13,745

8 5
7,629

8 5
13,995

14 9 8
8,916

2001/02 32 34 32 31 22 20 10 9
30,727

2002/03 33 35 33 32 23 25 10 8
34,622

2003/04 29 28 27 25 19 15 9 7
36,116

Unweighted n (minimum) 8,486 1. Base is total population aged 16 or over. 2. Other types of behaviour only added on to the survey in 2003/04.

Table A3.3 Perception of trend of ASB in last two years in local area Percentage 2003/04 BCS % 18 24 51 7 1 100

Got a lot worse Got a little worse Stayed the same Got a little better Got a lot better Total

Unweighted n 15,728 1. Based on those living in the same area for last two years.

Table A3.4 Percentage perceiving behaviour as biggest problem in local area Percentages 2003/04 BCS Biggest problem % 19 17 9 7 7 6 5 3 3 2 2 1 1 <1 <1 <1 1 17 100
17,670

Speeding traffic Teenagers hanging around Drug use or dealing Cars parked inconveniently, dangerously or illegally Rubbish or litter Vandalism and graffiti Uncontrolled dogs or dog mess Fireworks (not part of an organised display) People being drunk or rowdy in public places Noisy neighbours Abandoned or burnt-out cars People being insulted, pestered or intimidated Conflicts or disputes between neighbours Racial attacks or harassment People sleeping rough People using or carrying airguns/ replicas Cannot choose one None of these are a problem Total
Unweighted n 1. Base is total population aged 16 or over.

Table A4.1 Percentage perceiving very or fairly big problems by type of area Percentage within type of area Wealthy achievers 43 25 16 22 15 16 13 18 10 9 5 3 2 3 2 1
4,740 to 9,989

2003/04 BCS Urban prosperity 39 33 38 22 34 25 28 21 26 17 14 13 12 6 5 9
1,296 to 2,952

Speeding traffic Cars parked inconveniently or illegally Rubbish or litter Fireworks not part of an organised display Vandalism or graffiti Teenagers hanging around People using or dealing drugs Uncontrolled dogs and dog mess People being drunk or rowdy Abandoned cars People being pestered in the street Noisy neighbours parties Attack because of skin colour Disputes between neighbours People with airguns People sleeping rough
Unweighted n in range 4

Type of area Comfortably off 42 32 25 29 25 25 21 23 17 12 8 6 5 4 3 2
5,325 to 11,393

Moderate means Hard-pressed 45 47 37 31 38 41 33 37 35 41 35 41 32 41 31 34 24 27 18 25 14 19 11 17 9 11 8 11 4 6 3 5
2,403 to 5,244 3,796 to 8,216

1. Base is all aged 16 or over in each type of area. 2. Type of area defined using ACORN geodemographic tool (copyright CACI Ltd). 3. Read as '43% of those in wealthy achiever areas perceived very or fairly big problems with speeding traffic'. 4. Some of the measures were asked of a representative half of the total sample.

Table A4.2 Number of types of behaviour seen to be 'very' big problems in the local area by type of area Percentages Wealthy achievers 76 14 5 2 2 1 100 0.4 Urban prosperity 62 17 8 5 5 3 100 1.0
1,357

2003/04 BCS Comfortably off 68 16 7 3 4 2 100 0.7
5,381

None of types of ASB a 'very' big problem One type of behaviour a 'very' big problem Two types Three types Four to five types Six to sixteen types

Moderate means Hard-pressed 55 49 19 17 10 11 6 6 6 9 5 8 100 100 1.2
2,437

Total 64 16 8 4 5 3 100 0.9
17,872

Mean number

1.6
3,882

Unweighted n 4,777 1. Base is total population aged 16 or over. 2. Respondents asked about 16 types of behaviour. 3. Type of area defined using ACORN geodemographic tool (copyright CACI Ltd).

Table A4.3 Percentage perceiving behaviour as biggest problem in local area by type of area Percentage within type of area Wealthy achievers % 29 12 5 7 5 5 4 4 2 1 2 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 21 1 100
4,741

2003/04 BCS Type of area Urban Comfortably prosperity off % % 14 20 10 18 10 7 7 9 10 6 9 6 3 5 2 4 7 3 4 2 1 1 1 <1 1 <1 1 <1 1 <1 <1 <1 16 17 1 1 100 100
1,334 5,331

Speeding traffic Teenagers hanging around Drug use or dealing Cars parked inconveniently, dangerously or illegally Rubbish or litter Vandalism and graffiti Uncontrolled dogs or dog mess Fireworks (not part of an organised display) People being drunk or rowdy in public places Noisy neighbours Abandoned or burnt out cars People being insulted, pestered or intimidated Conflicts or disputes between neighbours Racial attacks or harassment People sleeping rough People using or carrying airguns/ replicas Cannot choose one None of these are a problem Total
Unweighted n 1. Base is all aged 16 or over in each type of area. 2. Type of area defined using ACORN geodemographic tool (copyright CACI Ltd).

Moderate means % 16 21 13 6 7 5 5 3 4 2 2 1 <1 1 <1 <1 13 1 100
2,395

Hard-pressed % 11 22 16 4 8 6 5 4 2 4 3 1 1 1 <1 <1 13 1 100
3,832

Table A4.4 Percentage perceiving behaviour as biggest problem by age group Percentage within age group 16-24 % 13 22 13 6 7 7 3 2 5 3 2 1 1 1 <1 <1 12 1 100
1,476

2003/04 BCS 25-44 % 20 20 10 6 5 6 5 2 4 3 2 1 1 1 <1 <1 14 1 100
6,010

Speeding traffic Teenagers hanging around Drug use or dealing Cars parked inconveniently, dangerously or illegally Rubbish or litter Vandalism and graffiti Uncontrolled dogs or dog mess Fireworks (not part of an organised display) People being drunk or rowdy in public places Noisy neighbours Abandoned or burnt-out cars People being insulted, pestered or intimidated Conflicts or disputes between neighbours Racial attacks or harassment People sleeping rough People using or carrying airguns/ replicas Cannot choose one None of these are a problem Total
Unweighted n 1. Base is all aged 16 and over in each age group.

Age group 45-64 % 20 16 10 8 7 6 4 5 2 2 2 <1 1 <1 <1 <1 16 1 100
5,787

65-74 % 22 13 5 7 10 5 7 6 2 2 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 19 1 100
2,317

75+ % 21 8 2 7 9 4 5 4 1 1 2 <1 <1 <1 <1 34 1 100
2,080

Table A4.5 Percentage perceiving high levels of ASB by local area characteristics Percentages Percentage perceiving high ASB Region North East North West Yorkshire & Humberside East Midlands West Midlands East of England London South East South West Wales Urbanisation Inner city Urban Rural Type of area (ACORN) 1 Wealthy achievers Urban prosperity Comfortably off Moderate means Hard-pressed Proportion of local population aged from 10 to 24 years 10% of areas with lowest proportion 10% of areas with highest proportion Proportion of local population who are White 10% of areas with lowest proportion 10% of areas with highest proportion
2 2

2003/04 BCS

Unweighted n

19 17 16 17 15 12 24 15 14 12

2,219 4,410 3,126 3,411 3,455 4,206 2,879 4,240 3,718 2,751

34 18 5

3,015 22,589 8,811

5 20 12 22 31

9,247 2,570 10,417 4,733 7,376

6 27

2,521 2,671

29 11
2

2,436 3,303

Proportion of local population who are economically active 10% of areas with lowest proportion 10% of areas with highest proportion

28 13
2

2,843 3,474

Proportion of local households that are couples with children 10% of areas with lowest proportion 10% of areas with highest proportion Neighbours look out for each other in the area? Yes, definitely Yes, to some extent No England and Wales
1. 2. 3. 4.

27 11

1,928 3,449

8 17 33 16

3,730 3,794 951 34,415

Type of area defined using ACORN geodemographic tool (copyright CACI Ltd). Classified using 2001 Census data at postcode sector level. Base is all aged 16 and over in each category. Read as '19% of those in the north east region perceived a high level of ASB in local area'.

Table A4.6 Percentage perceiving high levels of ASB by personal and household characteristics Percentages Percentage perceiving high ASB Age group 16-24 25-44 45-64 65-74 75+ Gender Male Female Ethnicity White Mixed Asian Black Other All BME groups Marital status Married or cohabiting Widowed Single Divorced or separated General level of health (self-defined) Very good Good Fair Bad Very bad Criminal victimisation Not victim in last year Victim in last year Newspaper readership National broadsheets National tabloids Other daily newspaper None Social grade Professional Managerial Skilled non-manual Skilled manual Semi-skilled Unskilled Household income Under £10,000 £10,000 to £14,999 £15,000 to £19,999 £20,000 to £29,999 £30,000 or more Tenure Owners Private rented sector Social rented sector 2003/04 BCS
Unweighted n

22 18 16 11 5

2,961 11,867 11,287 4,465 3,835

16 17

15,626 18,789

16 24 25 27 21 24

32,489 343 2,166 1,586 743 4,838

15 8 21 20

19,677 3,971 6,761 3,988

14 17 19 20 28

13,294 12,635 6,190 1,777 368

12 29

26,421 7,994

11 18 18 15

5,239 14,888 4,120 10,004

9 13 16 18 21 24

1,913 10,399 5,514 7,593 4,384 1,883

20 19 19 18 13

6,911 3,428 2,951 4,935 8,870

13 16 30

24,751 3,164 6,287

Accommodation type House Flat/ maisonette England and Wales

15 25 16

29,066 3,798 34,415

1. Base is all aged 16 and over in each category. 2. Read as '22% of those aged 16-24 perceived a high level of ASB in local area'.

Table A5.1 Stated sources of perceptions of problems for different types of ASB Percentages Young people Vandalism and hanging graffiti around % 91 39 20 5 3 3 13 <1
3,636

Drug use or dealing % 54 41 33 9 6 4 33 <1
3,204

Drunk or rowdy behaviour % 88 32 22 6 2 4 13 <1
2,307

2003/04 BCS Noisy neighbours % 96 29 4 2 1 2 3 <1
1,040

My own personal experience Experience of neighbours, friends or family Stories in the LOCAL newspapers, radio or TV Stories in the NATIONAL newspapers, radio or TV Authorities such as local or central government or the police Television dramas Something that is just generally known about in the area Other
Unweighted n 1. Base is those people who perceived very or fairly big problems with each strand. 2. Percentages add to more than 100 as multiple responses allowed.

% 88 35 26 6 4 3 15 <1
3,722

Table A5.2 Stated sources of perceptions of problems with vandalism and graffiti by type of area Percentages Wealthy achievers % 85 38 33 5 4 3 14 1
564

My own personal experience Experience of neighbours, friends or family Stories in the LOCAL newspapers, radio or TV Stories in the NATIONAL newspapers, radio or TV Authorities such as local or central government or the police Television dramas Something that is just generally known about in the area Other

Urban Comfortably prosperity off % % 91 88 28 34 20 31 8 7 4 3 2 4 15 15 <1 <1
341 1,044

Moderate means % 87 32 27 5 4 2 16 <1
643

2003/04 BCS Hard-pressed % 88 38 22 5 3 4 15 <1
1,123

Unweighted n 1. Base is those people who perceived very or fairly big problems with vandalism and graffiti. 2. Type of area defined using ACORN geodemographic tool (copyright CACI Ltd). 3. Percentages add to more than 100 as multiple responses allowed.

Table A5.3 Perceptions of problems and personal experience of types of behaviour in last 12 months Percentages Percentage of total population perceiving very or fairly big problem in local area
1

2003/04 BCS Percentage of those perceiving problems who have had personal experience in last 12 months 2 85 75 64 24 15 17 6 94

Type of behaviour Vandalism or graffiti

Type of personal experience Any experience of vandalism or graffiti Seen evidence of vandalism Seen evidence of graffiti Seen people vandalising Seen people writing graffiti Own property affected by vandalism Own property affected by graffiti

Unweighted n 3,805 3,805 3,805 3,805 3,805 3,805 3,805

28

Teenagers hanging around

27

Seen young people hanging around on the street

3,677

Drug use or dealing

25

Any experience of drug use or dealing Seen evidence of using drugs Seen evidence of dealing drugs Seen evidence - not sure whether using or dealing drugs Seen or heard people being drunk or rowdy Experienced problems with noisy neighbours

55 42 28 5 87 87

3,271 3,271 3,271 3,271 2,365 1,057

People being drunk or rowdy Noisy neighbours

19 9

Unweighted n 36,116 1. Based on total population. Read as '28% of all aged 16 and over perceived very or fairly big problems in local area with vandalism or graffiti'. 2. Based on those who perceived a very or fairly big problem. Read as '85% of those perceiving a very or fairly big problem with vandalism had experienced it in last 12 months'.

Table A5.4 Frequency of experience of young people hanging around by type of area Percentages Wealthy achievers % 5 18 36 40 100
613

Not experienced young people hanging around Low relative frequency of experience Medium High relative frequency of experience Total
Unweighted n

Urban Comfortably off Moderate means prosperity % % % 11 6 6 20 16 12 23 31 23 47 48 60 100 100 100
246 1,041 636

2003/04 BCS Hard-pressed Total % 6 9 22 63 100
1,129

% 6 14 27 53 100
3,753

1. Base is those perceiving very or fairly big problem in area with type of behaviour. 2. Type of area defined using ACORN geodemographic tool (copyright CACI Ltd). 3. 'Relative frequency' places a rougly even proportion of respondents in the high, medium and low categories across the types of behaviour.

Table A5.5 Reporting of incidents among those who experienced them Percentages Noisy Drug use or Young people Vandalism or neighbours dealing hanging graffiti around % % % % Individual or agency complained to: Those actually causing the problem Parents/families of those causing the problem Landlord of the house or flat Pub landlord / Bar manager Police Neighbourhood Watch Neighbourhood warden Local council department Local councillor/MP or other elected official Tenants/residents association Teachers or local school Bus company Train company Other Not complained to anyone 27 8 7 n/a 14 1 1 16 2 3 <1 n/a n/a 3 46 5 4 2 3 15 1 <1 3 2 2 2 n/a n/a 2 72
1,619

2003/04 BCS Drunk or rowdy behaviour % 4 3 1 2 9 1 1 3 2 1 <1 n/a n/a 1 80
2,039

7 4 1 1 11 2 1 4 2 2 1 n/a n/a 1 75
3,448

4 3 n/a n/a 9 2 1 6 3 3 1 <1 <1 2 75
3,202

Unweighted n 922 1. Base is those actually experiencing problems in last 12 months. 2. Percentages add to more than 100 as multiple responses allowed. 3. Read as '27% of those experiencing noisy neighbours complained to those actually causing the problem'.

Table A5.6 View of who is responsible for stopping or reducing ASB Percentages Young people hanging around 16 76 2 4 17 9 51 5 3 9 22 11 1 1 Vandalism and graffiti 18 65 2 4 16 9 59 10 5 15 23 11 0 2 Drug use or dealing 19 53 5 11 21 8 74 7 4 25 19 23 1 1 2003/04 BCS Drunk or rowdy behaviour 17 42 4 31 7 5 58 4 3 12 19 14 2 3
2268

Local people themselves Parents Landlords of flats or houses Pub landlords / Bar managers Schools/ teachers Local community or tenants groups Police Neighbourhood Watch Neighbourhood Wardens Courts Local council National government Other None of these groups

Unweighted n 3607 3726 3206 1. Base is those perceiving problems with each behaviour. 2. Percentages add to more than 100 as multiple responses allowed. 3. Read as '16% of those perceiving problems with young people felt local people responsible for stopping it'.

Percentages

Local people themselves Parents Landlords of flats or houses Local community or tenants groups Police Neighbourhood Watch Neighbourhood Wardens Courts Local council Environmental Health Department The Housing Office National government Other None of these groups

2003/04 BCS Noisy neighbours 29 21 17 6 37 3 3 4 28 15 7 4 2 6

Unweighted n 1007 1. Base is those perceiving problems with each behaviour. 2. Percentages add to more than 100 as multiple responses allowed.

Table A6.1 The specific nature of ASB incidents on last occasion Percentages 2003/04 BCS Of those experiencing the general type of ASB % Young people hanging around Being loud, rowdy or noisy Swearing/ using bad language Just being a general nuisance Drinking Blocking the pavement Littering (e.g. spitting gum on the street) Being abusive/ harassing or insulting people Blocking the entrance to shops Generally intimidating or threatening people Fighting with each other Taking drugs Damaging property or cars Writing graffiti Physically assaulting people Mugging or robbing people Something else Not doing anything in particular
Unweighted n

48 48 43 31 29 24 17 16 11 9 6 5 5 1 1 1 6
3,437

Vandalism and graffiti - target Bus shelters/ phone boxes/ toilets/other public facilities Local parks, playgrounds or other open spaces Local shops or commercial premises Gardens/ fences Cars or other vehicles Houses/ flats Local public transport Communal housing areas (e.g. lights or lifts) Local public monuments, artwork or planted areas Local schools Underpasses / subways Road signs / other signs Other
Unweighted n

52 16 15 15 12 9 5 5 4 3 1 1 3
3,190

Vandalism and graffiti - reason a problem It spoilt how things look It will have cost the council or businesses money to deal with it It will have cost other local residents money to deal with it It meant that things could not be used properly or used at all It meant that things became unsafe or dangerous to use It cost me or my household money to deal with it It will have cost other local residents time to deal with it It cost me time to deal with it Other No particular problem with the incident
Unweighted n 1. Base is those experiencing the different types of ASB. 2. Percentages add to more than 100 as multiple responses allowed. 3. Read as '48% of those experiencing problems with young people hanging around said they were being loud, rowdy or noisy'.

58 49 23 21 19 10 10 7 1 3
3,178

Table A6.1 The specific nature of ASB incidents on last occasion 2003/04 BCS Of those experiencing the general type of ASB % Drug use or dealing People smoking marijuana or cannabis in public places People dealing drugs Children and teenagers taking drugs People taking/ being on hard drugs (like crack, heroin, cocaine) Used needles (e.g. on the streets, in stairwells, car parks) Stealing, theft or burglary related to drug use General violent crime related to drug use or dealing Begging related to drug use Drug dealers or users being intimidating to local people Violence between drug gangs Crack houses (particular houses routinely used for dealing and using crack) Other No particular drug related problem
Unweighted n

39 31 28 19 15 11 7 7 6 3 3 1 7
1,593

Drunk or rowdy behaviour Noise from people in the streets when they have been drinking People being abusive when they have been drinking Cans and bottles left on the streets or thrown into gardens Young people drinking in local streets/parks and other public places People being intimidating when they have been drinking Fast food wrapping left on the streets or thrown into gardens Being kept awake by drunken and rowdy behaviour Fighting within or between groups People urinating in public places Vomit on the pavements Violence/people being assaulted by drunks Drink-related theft or vandalism Homeless people and alcoholics drinking in local streets/parks and public places Drunk people begging Other Nothing in particular
Unweighted n 1. Base is those experiencing the different types of ASB. 2. Percentages add to more than 100 as multiple responses allowed. 3. Read as '39% of those experiencing problems with drug use or dealing said people were smoking cannabis in public'.

64 40 31 26 25 23 21 15 14 11 9 6 5 3 <1 3
2,042

Table A6.1 The specific nature of ASB incidents on last occasion 2003/04 BCS Percentage of those experiencing ASB % Noisy neighbours - nature of noise Loud music Arguments or fights General talking or shouting Parties People revving cars (or other vehicles) Dogs Children playing DIY (e.g. hammering on walls) Television Other Nothing in particular
Unweighted n

51 25 25 22 11 10 9 7 3 4 1
923

Noisy neighbours - reason a problem Being kept awake General annoyance Activities at home being disturbed (e.g. unable to read or hear TV) Children in the household being frightened or intimidated by the noise Being frightened or intimidated by the noise Being stopped from working at home Other Nothing in particular
Unweighted n 1. Base is those experiencing types of ASB. 2. Percentages add to more than 100 as multiple responses allowed. 3. Read as '22% of those experiencing problems with noisy neighbours said noise was from parties'.

69 46 28 9 8 3 1 <1
924

Table A6.2 Percentage of offenders perceived to be deliberately anti-social Percentages Percentage of those perceiving problems % 64 % 58 % 45 2003/04 BCS

Unweighted n 3,602 2,308 1,030

Young people hanging around Drunk or rowdy behaviour Noisy neighbours

1. Base is those perceiving problems with types of ASB. 2. Read as '64% of those perceiving problems with young people hanging around believed they were being deliberately anti-social'.

Table A6.3 Percentage of most recent incidents where behaviour was directed towards respondent personally Percentages Percentage where ASB directed at respondent 23 10 6 6 4 2003/04 BCS

Unweighted n 2,042 3,437 3,190 1,593 918

Drunk or rowdy behaviour 1 Young people hanging around 2 Vandalism and graffiti 3 Drug use or dealing 4 Noisy neighbours 5

% % % % %

1. Type of behaviour against respondent includes abuse, intimidation, litter in garden, being kept awake, violence, theft, vandalism and begging. 2. Includes swearing, abuse, assault, mugging, intimidation and threats. 3. Against respondent's property. 4. Includes intimidation, violence, theft and begging. 5. Noise specifically directed at respondent. 6. Base is those experiencing problems with each type of behaviour.

Table A6.4 Frequency of personal experience of ASB in last 12 months Percentages Young people hanging around % 6 <1 7 6 27 41 13 100 Noisy Drunk or rowdy neighbours behaviour % % 13 13 1 2 16 20 14 17 29 36 22 10 5 2 100 100
2,364

2003/04 BCS Drug use or dealing % 45 4 20 9 11 8 2 100
3,260

No experience in last 12 months Once in the last 12 months A few times in the last 12 months Around once a month Around once a week More or less every day All the time Total

Vandalism and graffiti % 15 8 35 21 14 4 3 100
3,753

Unweighted n 3,671 1,055 1. Base is those perceiving very or fairly big problem in area with type of behaviour.

Table A6.5 Location of ASB incidents experienced 2003/04 BCS Of those experiencing the general type of ASB % Young people hanging around In or around local shops In other streets in the area/street corners In my street In parks, playgrounds or other open spaces At bus stops In shopping centres or precincts Alleyways Outside or near pubs, clubs or nightclubs Outside or near schools Garage areas/stairwells/communal areas Places of entertainment (e.g. cinemas, cafes, restaurants) At train stations Outside or near youth clubs On public transport (e.g. trains, buses) Other No one particular place
Unweighted n

62 49 44 37 22 21 18 18 11 10 7 7 6 6 1 <1
3,458

Drug use or dealing Streets (not own street) Own street on foot Parks Near pubs and clubs Local shops In pubs, bars or nightclubs Own street in cars Alleys Own homes Bus stops Shopping centres Near schools Communal areas Public transport Train stations Near youth clubs Crack houses Places of entertainment Elsewhere No one particular place
Unweighted n

39 37 32 29 25 21 20 19 14 13 12 9 8 7 6 6 4 3 2 1
1,615

Drunk or rowdy behaviour Outside or near pubs, clubs or nightclubs In my street In other streets in the area/street corners In or around local shops In parks, playground or other open spaces At bus stops In shopping centres or precincts Alleyways On public transport (e.g. trains, buses) Places of entertainment (e.g. cinemas, cafes, restaurants) At train stations Garage areas/stair wells/communal areas Outside or near youth clubs Outside or near schools Other No one particular place
Unweighted n 1. Base is those who have experienced each type of ASB. 2. Percentages add to more than 100 as multiple responses allowed. 3. Read as '62% of those experiencing problems with noisy neighbours said problems occurred around shops'.

50 48 46 36 27 19 17 13 11 9 8 5 5 4 1 0
2,048

Table A6.6 Timing of incidents experienced Percentages Noisy neighbours % 9 15 50 51 16 3 22 75 Young people hanging around % 2 16 82 20 12 4 13 83 2003/04 BCS Drunk or rowdy behaviour % 1 7 59 62 7 2 44 54
2,047

Mornings 2 Afternoons Evening (6 - 11pm) At night (after 11pm) All the time Weekdays Weekends Both weekdays and weekends

Unweighted n 921 3,451 1. Base is those who have experienced each type of ASB. 2. Percentages add to more than 100 as multiple responses allowed (respondent could be referring to multiple incidents).

Table A6.7 Types of behaviour seen or heard in last 12 months by regular users - town centres Percentages 2003/04 BCS % In high streets or town centres 1 Young people hanging around Rubbish or litter lying around People being drunk or rowdy Begging at cash points and other places Vandalism, graffiti or other deliberate damage Noisy or disruptive people in the area Shops or other buildings in poor condition People sleeping rough Uncontrolled dogs or dog mess People being insulted or pestered People using or dealing drugs Abandoned or burnt-out vehicles People being harassed or threatened People being assaulted or hurt in the street People being harassed because of their skin colour, ethnic origin or religion People being mugged or robbed Other Not experienced any of these problems
Unweighted n 1. Base is those regularly visiting high streets or town centres. 2. Percentages add to more than 100 as multiple responses allowed. 3. Prompted list of behaviours used for this question.

58 49 41 34 33 28 26 25 18 13 13 10 9 7 5 4 1 17
7,542

Table A6.8 Types of behaviour seen or heard in last 12 months by regular users - public transport Percentages 2003/04 BCS % On public transport 1 Rubbish or litter Noisy or disruptive passengers Vandalism, graffiti or other deliberate damage People being drunk or rowdy People smoking in non-smoking areas People begging Fare dodging Passengers being insulted or pestered Ticket touts Passengers being harassed or threatened People using or dealing drugs Passengers being harassed because of their skin colour, ethnic origin or religion Passengers being mugged or robbed Other Not experienced any of these problems
Unweighted n 1. Base is those regularly using public transport. 2. Percentages add to more than 100 as multiple responses allowed.

44 41 34 30 27 25 23 15 9 9 5 5 2 2 28
2,904

Table A7.1 Number of offenders in most recent incident Percentages Young people hanging around % 0 5 26 44 20 5 100
3,425

One 2-3 4-5 6-9 10 - 15 More than 15 Total

Vandalism and graffiti % 12 30 27 18 8 4 100
299

2003/04 BCS Drunk or rowdy behaviour % 6 25 32 22 9 6 100
2,049

Unweighted n 1. Base is those experiencing ASB type.

Table A7.2 Gender of offenders Percentages Young people hanging around % 21 1 78 100
3,453

Vandalism and graffiti % 57 5 38 100
301

Drug use or dealing % 48 2 50 100
1,576

Male Female Both Total
Unweighted n 1. Base is those experiencing ASB type.

Drunk or rowdy behaviour % 37 1 62 100
2,000

2003/04 BCS Noisy neighbours % 25 9 66 100
900

Table A7.3 Age of offenders Percentages Young people hanging around % 7 20 76 58 18 3 Vandalism Drug use or and graffiti dealing % 14 22 51 42 15 8 2 1 1
301

10 years or younger 11-12 13-15 16-17 18-20 21 years or older

10 years or younger 11-12 13-15 16-17 18-20 21-25 26-30 31-40 41 or older

% 1 5 23 38 43 42 24 12 3
1,560

Drunk or rowdy behaviour % 1 3 18 33 44 37 15 10 6
1,927

2003/04 BCS Noisy neighbours % 9 7 12 13 20 29 23 30 20
870

Unweighted n 3,437 1. Base is those experiencing ASB type. 2. Percentages add to more than 100 as some incidents involved offenders of different ages.

Table A7.4 Ethnicity of offenders Percentages Young people hanging around White Black Asian Chinese Another ethnic group 97 22 12 2 1 Vandalism and graffiti 94 16 10 4 1 Drug use or dealing 90 25 12 3 1
1,568

Drunk or rowdy behaviour 98 14 7 2 1
1,919

2003/04 BCS Noisy neighbours 91 12 5 2 3
879

Unweighted n 3,428 299 1. Base is those experiencing ASB type. 2. Percentages add to more than 100 as some incidents involved offenders of different ages.

Table A7.5 Offender and victim relationship Percentages 2003/04 BCS Young people Vandalism and Drunk or rowdy hanging around graffiti behaviour % % % 5 9 6 26 35 17 96 81 93
3,446 301 2,011

Some or all known well Some or all known casually or by sight Some or all stangers
Unweighted n

1. Base is those experiencing type of ASB and seeing offenders. 2. Percentages add to more than 100 as some incidents involved multiple offenders. 3. Not asked for drug use or dealing.

Table A7.6 Whether offenders perceived to be from local area Percentages Young people Vandalism and hanging around graffiti % 95 24
2,996

Drug use or dealing

Some or all from the local area Some or all from outside the local area
Unweighted n

% 95 15
259

2003/04 BCS Drunk or rowdy behaviour % % 92 93 34 26
1,595

1,369

1. Base is those experiencing type of ASB and seeing offenders. 2. Percentages add to more than 100 as some incidents involved multiple offenders.

Table A7.7 Relationship between offenders and victim in incidents of drunk or rowdy behaviour Percentages Wealthy achievers % 5 16 97
270

Some or all known well Some or all known casually or by sight Some or all stangers
Unweighted n

Urban Comfortably off prosperity % % 2 4 8 16 98 97
241 574

2003/04 BCS Moderate Hardmeans pressed % % 6 10 15 25 92 87
346 578

1. Base is those seeing drunk or rowdy behaviour. 2. Percentages add to more than 100 as some incidents involved multiple offenders.

Table A7.8 Comparison of age groups of offenders and victims in incidents of young people hanging around Percentages 16-19 % 3 5 66 72 27 1
172

2003/04 BCS 20-24 % 5 13 69 54 24 5
230

Age of offender 10 years or younger 11-12 13-15 16-17 18-20 21 years or older
Unweighted n

25-34 % 7 20 77 57 17 4
666

Age of victim 35-44 45-54 % % 6 9 18 24 77 80 56 58 19 14 2 2
714 551

55-64 % 11 30 81 59 17 4
542

65-74 % 9 29 79 57 16 2
354

75 or older % 10 32 75 57 15 0
208

1. Base is those experiencing young people hanging around. 2. Percentages add to more than 100 as some incidents involved multiple offenders. 3. Read as 'in 3% of incidents experienced by 16 to 19 year olds an offender was 10 years old or younger'.

Table A7.9 Comparison of ethnicity of offenders and victims in incidents of young people hanging around Percentages Ethnicity of victim Black and Minority Ethnic White % % 89 97 57 18 35 10 6 2 7 1
205 3,223

Ethnicity of offender White Black Asian Chinese Another ethnic group
Unweighted n

1. Base is those experiencing young people hanging around. 2. Percentages add to more than 100 as some incidents involved multiple offenders. 3. Read as 'in 89% of incidents experienced by BME respondents, an offender was White'.

Table A8.1 Effect of types of ASB on quality of life Percentages 2003/04 BCS Bad effect on quality of life % 11 11 7 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 2 2 1 1 <1 <1 61
17,726

Speeding traffic Teenagers hanging around on the streets Rubbish or litter lying around Fireworks being set off that are not part of an organised display Vandalism, graffiti and other deliberate damage to property or vehicles Cars parked inconveniently, dangerously or illegally Noisy neighbours or loud parties Uncontrolled dogs or dog mess People using or dealing drugs People being drunk or rowdy in public places Abandoned or burnt-out cars People being insulted, pestered or intimidated in the street Conflicts or disputes between neighbours People being attacked or harassed because of their skin colour, ethnic origin, or religion People using or carrying airguns or replica guns People sleeping rough on the streets or in other public places None of these are a problem
Unweighted n 1. Base is total population aged 16 and over. 2. Percentages add to more than 100 as multiple responses allowed.

Table A8.2 Emotional response to ASB problems in the local area Percentages Young people hanging around % 26 3 11 22 54 23 7 2 3 9 1 <1 20 19 Vandalism and graffiti % 38 5 4 10 58 26 4 2 1 3 <1 1 16 12
3,795

Anger Shock Fear Worry Annoyance Frustration Stress Depression Anxiety/ panic attacks Loss of confidence Crying Other None of these Serious emotional impact 2

Drug use or dealing % 25 10 13 35 30 16 5 3 2 6 1 1 27 23
3,269

Drunk or rowdy behaviour % 26 5 11 19 55 18 6 2 2 8 1 2 19 19
2,347

2003/04 BCS Noisy neighbours % 43 4 5 12 70 38 20 5 3 4 3 1 8 27
1,055

Unweighted n 3,663 1. Base is those perceiving problems in their area with each type of ASB. 2. Includes shock, fear, stress, depression, anxiety/panic attacks, crying. 3. Percentages add to more than 100 as multiple responses allowed.

Table A8.3 Impact on quality of life of ASB in the local area Percentages Young people hanging around Vandalism and graffiti Drug use or dealing Drunk or rowdy behaviour 2003/04 BCS Noisy neighbours

Of those perceiving problems: 1 Low impact on quality of life Medium High impact on quality of life Total
Unweighted n

% 38 41 22 100
3,655

% 43 41 16 100
3,790

% 52 29 19 100
3,270

% 39 41 20 100
2,352

% 20 40 40 100
1,054

Of the total population: 2 Low impact on quality of life Medium High impact on quality of life Total

% 83 11 6 100

% 84 11 5 100

% 88 7 5 100

% 88 8 4 100

% 93 4 4 100
37,879

Unweighted n 37,836 37,837 36,116 37,685 1. Base is those perceiving problems in their area with each type of ASB. 2. Figures based on total population assume that those who did not perceive problems in the local area experienced low impact on their quality of life. 3. Categories based on scores given by respondent out of 10: low=1 or 2, medium=3 to 5, high=6 to 10.

Table A8.4 Behaviour changes as a result of ASB problems Percentages 2003/04 BCS Young people Vandalism and Drug use or Drunk or rowdy hanging around graffiti dealing behaviour % % % % 10 12 8 8 1 1 1 1 18 13 22 20 18 14 16 17 12 7 10 13 9 8 11 8 11 10 9 9 1 <1 1 1 9 5 7 9 10 7 12 11 4 2 2 10 13 6 10 10 1 0 1 1 <1 <1 1 1 1 <1 1 1 47 58 51 47 41
3,657

Improved home/ car security Carry a personal security device Avoid certain places in my local area Avoid going out after dark Avoid going out on my own Not very trusting of people in the local area Thought about moving away Actually moved out of an area Use a car/ taxis rather than walk in the local area Have encouraged family or friends not to go out alone Have not been able to sleep at times Have felt unsafe Have been assaulted Avoid staying at home Other None of these Any behavioural change 2

33
3,758

39
3,272

47
2,354

Unweighted n 1. Base is those perceiving problems in their area with each type of ASB. 2. Does not include not very trusting, thought about moving, felt unsafe, been assaulted. 3. Percentages add to more than 100 as multiple responses allowed.

Percentages

Improved home/ car security Used earplugs Played loud music in response to noise Kept windows or doors closed Avoid going out in the garden or outside the home Have installed soundproofing Have gone out less often after dark Not very trusting of people in the local area Thought about moving away Actually moved out of an area Avoid staying at home Other None of these Any behavioural change 2
Unweighted n 1. Base is those perceiving problems in their area with each type of ASB. 2. Does not include not very trusting, thought about moving. 3. Percentages add to more than 100 as multiple responses allowed.

2003/04 BCS Noisy neighbours % 5 6 7 32 12 1 3 5 19 <1 3 2 47 45
1,055

Table A8.5 Percentage for whom young people hanging around has high impact on quality of life - by area characteristics Young people hanging around Percentage of total population perceiving very or fairly big problems with young people hanging around 1 Region North East North West Yorkshire & Humberside East Midlands West Midlands East of England London South East South West Wales Urbanisation Inner-city Urban Rural Type of area (ACORN) 4 Wealthy achievers Urban prosperity Comfortably off Moderate means Hard pressed Percentage of those perceiving problems who experienced high impact on quality of life 2
Unwt n Unwt n

2003/04 BCS Percentage of total population experiencing high impact on quality of life 3

% % % % % % % % % %

34 31 27 27 25 23 32 27 22 23

2,417 4,864 3,393 3,670 3,746 4,675 3,428 4,609 4,027 3,007

25 29 24 18 20 19 25 17 15 22

284 508 339 354 333 407 379 471 312 268

8 9 6 5 5 5 8 5 3 5

% % %

39 30 15

3,382 24,916 9,538

31 21 16

455 2,645 555

12 6 2

% % % % %

16 25 25 35 41

9,982 2,950 11,382 5,238 8,204

15 19 19 22 29

615 242 1,036 633 1,123

2 5 5 8 12

Proportion of local population aged from 10 to 24 years 5 10% of areas with lowest proportion % 10% of areas with highest proportion %

15 32

2,732 2,977

16 27

160 337

2 9

Proportion of local population who are White 5 10% of areas with lowest proportion 10% of areas with highest proportion

% %

33 20

2,868 3,564

26 21

332 291

9 4

Proportion of local population who are economically active 5 10% of areas with lowest proportion % 10% of areas with highest proportion % Proportion of local households that are couples with children 5 10% of areas with lowest proportion % 10% of areas with highest proportion % Neighbours look out for each other in the area? Yes, definitely Yes, to some extent No All perceiving problems
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

34 25

3,165 3,835

30 15

360 379

10 4

31 24

2,158 3,776

29 23

216 352

9 6

% % %

18 29 41

4,087 4,241 1,067

17 21 33

537 911 314

3 6 14 6

% 27 37,836 22 3,655 Base is total population in each category. Base is those perceiving a very or fairly big problem in local area with young people hanging around. Base is total population in each category. Assumption is made here that those who do not perceive problems in the area do not experience high impact on quality of life. Type of area defined using ACORN geodemographic tool (copyright CACI Ltd). Classified using 2001 Census data at postcode sector level.

Table A8.6 Percentage for whom young people hanging around had high impact on quality of life - by personal characteristics Young people hanging around Percentage of total population perceiving very or fairly big problems with young people hanging around 1 Age group 16-24 25-44 45-64 65-74 75+ Gender Male Female Ethnicity White BME Marital status Married or cohabiting Widowed Single Divorced or separated Criminal victimisation Not victim in last year Victim in last year Social grade Professional Managerial Skilled non-manual Skilled manual Semi-skilled Unskilled Household income Under £10,000 £10,000 to £14,999 £15,000 to £19,999 £20,000 to £29,999 £30,000 or more Tenure Owners Private rented sector Social rented sector Percentage of those perceiving problems who experienced high impact on quality of life
Unwt n
2

2003/04 BCS Percentage of total population experiencing high impact on quality of life 3
Unwt n

% % % % %

33 30 26 22 14

3,206 12,909 12,333 4,976 4,412

20 21 25 21 15

417 1,441 1,151 398 248

7 6 7 5 2

% %

27 27

16,975 20,861

21 22

1,597 2,058

6 6

% %

27 32

35,621 2,211

21 27

3,423 232

6 9

% % % %

26 19 32 31

21,415 4,551 7,437 4,414

22 19 21 22

2,003 331 854 466

6 4 7 7

% %

23 40

29,061 8,775

21 24

2,466 1,189

5 9

% % % % % %

21 25 28 28 31 34

2,106 11,357 6,111 8,269 4,818 2,107

19 19 21 23 26 24

156 1,016 587 801 544 215

4 5 6 6 8 8

% % % % %

30 28 30 29 25

7,738 3,747 3,208 5,339 9,551

26 26 28 20 17

797 352 352 550 881

8 7 8 6 4

% % %

25 26 38

27,062 3,507 7,012

20 20 27

2,397 338 892

5 5 10

Accommodation type House Flat/maisonette All perceiving problems

% %

26 34

31,832 4,325

22 22

3,005 487

6 8 6

% 27 37,836 22 3,655 1. Base is total population in each category. 2. Base is those perceiving a very or fairly big problem in local area with young people hanging around. 3. Base is total population in each category. Assumption is made here that those who do not perceive problems in the area do not experience high impact on quality of life.

Table A8.7 Percentage of those perceiving problems in local area for whom ASB had high impact on quality of life - by ASB characteristics Percentage experiencing high impact Young people hanging around
Unwt n

Vandalism and graffiti
Unwt n

Drug use or dealing
Unwt n

Drunk or rowdy behaviour
Unwt n

2003/04 BCS Noisy neighbours
Unwt n

Frequency of experience of type of ASB Not experienced Low Medium High relative frequency of experience Emotional impact resulting from ASB No serious emotional impact Serious emotional impact Behavioural impact resulting from ASB No behavioural impact Any behavioural impact All perceiving problems

% % % %

6 14 16 28

210 537 1,027 1,874

14 15 13 25

581 1,673 781 697

15 14 23 40

1,636 745 596 266

6 14 22 40

306 543 1,224 276

10 30 39 63

132 165 432 323

% %

15 49

2,973 674

13 39

3,324 451

13 38

2,515 739

15 44

1,899 442

30 69

769 283

% % %

14 33 22

2,159 1,480 3,655

12 24 16

2,519 1,219 3,790

12 30 19

2,027 1,227 3,270

12 29 20

1,238 1,106 2,352

35 47 40

596 456 1,054

1. Base is those perceiving very or fairly big problems in local area with each type of ASB. 2. Read as '6% of those who did not experience young people hanging around in last 12 months said they experienced a high impact on their quality of life as a result of problems in the area (among those perceiving problems in the area with young people)'.

Table A8.8 Percentage of those perceiving problems with teenagers hanging around by experience and impact 2003/04 BCS Teenagers hanging around Teenagers hanging around a a very big problem fairly big problem % % Frequency of experience Not experienced Low Medium High relative frequency of experience Total Quality of life impact Low impact Medium High impact Total Emotional impact resulting No serious emotional impact Serious emotional impact Total Behavioural impact resulting No behavioural impact Any behavioural impact Total

4 9 22 66 100

7 16 29 48 100

25 39 36 100

43 42 15 100

73 27 100

85 15 100

49 51 100

63 37 100
2,607

Unweighted n 1,048 1. Base is those perceiving very or fairly big problems in local area with teenagers hanging around.

Table A8.9 Percentage worried about crime by level of perceived ASB 2003/04 BCS High perceived Not high ASB perceived ASB % % High worry about violence 1 Not high worry about violence Total
Unweighted n

Total % 12 88 100
34,415

25 75 100
5,094

9 91 100
29,321

High worry about burglary Not high worry about burglary Total

28 72 100

9 91 100

12 88 100

Unweighted n 5,092 29,311 34,403 1. Worry about violence measure assumes those saying 'not applicable' to violence questions did not have high level of worry.

Table A8.10 Percentage worried about crime by level of perceived problems with vandalism and graffiti 2003/04 BCS Very big problem Fairly big Not a very big Not a problem Total problem problem at all % % % % % High worry about violence 1 Not high worry about violence Total
Unweighted n

28 72 100
2,840

15 85 100
7,152

10 90 100
15,239

8 92 100
12,606

12 88 100
37,837

High worry about burglary Not high worry about burglary Total

33 67 100

16 84 100

10 90 100

8 92 100
12,597

13 87 100
37,820

Unweighted n 2,838 7,152 15,233 1. Worry about violence measure assumes those saying 'not applicable' to violence questions did not have high level of worry.

Table A8.11 Whether people enjoy living in local area by perception of high ASB Percentages High perceived Not high ASB perceived ASB % % 40 74 40 22 20 3 100 100
1,154 7,365

2003/04 BCS Total % 69 25 6 100
8,519

Whether enjoy living in local area: Yes,definitely Yes, to some extent No Total
Unweighted n 1. Base is all aged 16 and over.

Table A8.12 Whether people enjoy living in local area by perceptions of vandalism and graffiti Percentages Very big problem % 39 39 22 100
651

Whether enjoy living in local area: Yes,definitely Yes, to some extent No Total
Unweighted n 1. Base is all aged 16 and over.

2003/04 BCS Fairly big Not a very Not a problem problem big problem at all Total % % % % 56 69 83 68 34 27 15 25 10 4 2 6 100 100 100 100
1,701 3,853 3,243 9,448

Table A8.13 Crime victimisation rates and high perceived ASB by type of area 2003/04 BCS Crimes per 10,000 households/ individuals Percentage feeling neighbours don't look out for each other 2 20 16 22 8 6

Hard-pressed Moderate means Urban prosperity Comfortably off Wealthy achievers

BCS household BCS personal crime 1 crime 2 3,810 1,180 4,259 1,328 4,035 1,687 2,874 906 2,111 778

Unwtd n 8,231 5,248 2,963 11,408 10,000

Unwtd n 2,025 1,249 711 2,820 2,577

% % % % %

Percentage perceiving high ASB 2 31 22 20 12 5

Unwtd n 7,376 4,733 2,570 10,417 9,247

1. Base is all households in England and Wales. 2. Base is all individuals aged 16 and over. 3. Type of area defined using ACORN geodemographic tool (copyright CACI Ltd).