The publication of the latest Index of Multiple Deprivation 2025 (IMD 2025) paints a stark picture of the scale and persistence of deprivation in England, and by extension the UK. But amid the sobering data lies a clear mandate: the only path to genuine change is via democratised, open-to-all initiatives that empower communities, not simply treat symptoms. In this light, initiatives such as Angels Connect offer a vital model – one that moves beyond charity to community agency, connecting individuals to advice, resources and networks in ways that align with the systemic challenge laid bare by the data.

The IMD 2025 has been published by the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government and ranks 33,755 Lower-layer Super Output Areas (LSOAs) in England by levels of multiple deprivation. The seven domains captured – income, employment, education/skills & training, health & disability, crime, barriers to housing & services, and living environment show how deprivation is not simply an income problem but a cluster of intersecting risks.

Some of the key findings:

• Among the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods (3,375 LSOAs), 99.1% are in the most deprived decile on at least 2 domains and 67.2% on four or more domains.
• At local authority level, some areas show very high concentrations: for example, Middlesbrough has 50 % of its LSOAs among the most deprived 10% nationally.
• More than half of the LSOAs that rank among the most deprived 1% nationally in 2025 have been in that group in every published version of the IMD since 2004, signalling deep, persistent deprivation.
• Geographical patterns remain: the Midlands, North, coastal and post-industrial towns dominate the bottom rankings. But crucially the data also shows that deprivation is not confined to remote or rural areas, it is strongly present in urban neighbourhoods locked into multi-domain disadvantage.

In sum, the data confirms what many frontline agencies observe: deprivation is structural, multi-dimensional and deeply rooted. It cannot be addressed solely through isolated interventions (e.g., only food support or only housing subsidies). The problem requires an integrated approach – one that unlocks agency, addresses root causes (employment, skills, rights), and builds resilient social systems.

Given the data, policy must move beyond the “targeted safety net” model to embrace a more open, inclusive and system-wide response. Here are three imperatives:

1. From targeted to universal access in advice and support. Areas in the poorest deciles suffer multiple burdens simultaneously – joblessness, poor health, low educational attainment, insecure housing. So limiting services only to those deemed “most in need” runs the risk of missing many who fall just outside thresholds but are still exposed to multi-domain disadvantage. Universal access to high-quality advice (on debt, welfare, employment, housing) should be considered a public good. This reflects a shift in thinking: from reactive to preventive, from crisis-management to empowerment.
2. Local networks, digital referral and community agency
   The geography of deprivation shows persistent neighbourhood disadvantage. Policy therefore must invest in local networks that are embedded in community life, digital platforms that facilitate referral and triage of need, and training that enables neighbourhood actors (volunteers, community workers) to act as connectors. This is an inclusive model: open to all, not just those already in the system.
3. Data-driven, but democratised decision-making
   The IMD 2025 data is vital, but the translation from insight to action must involve local voices. Data should underpin but not dictate strategy. Residents of deprived areas must have a voice in shaping how services are delivered, and how open-access platforms are configured. Moreover, the domains show that interventions must span welfare, housing, employment, health – so policy must join up across silos.

Angels Connect is an exemplar of the kind of democratised, inclusive initiative policy should encourage. Rooted in the community, digital-enabled, and open to all who are navigating life-challenges, it offers a fresh blueprint, one aligned with the structural nature of deprivation the IMD 2025 reveals.

Open access, not gate-kept: Rather than being confined to narrowly defined benefit recipients, Angels Connect’s model allows anyone to engage with training, advice, digital referral and community networks. This aligns with the universal-access imperative above.

Referral infrastructure meets lived experience: Recognising that people living in deprived areas interact with multiple systems (housing, benefits, debt), Angels Connect offers a referral network and triage model connecting people to life-changing advice. This resonates with the IMD’s multi-domain nature of deprivation.

Community capacity building & empowerment: The model does not only deliver services, it builds capability in communities, enabling volunteers and local actors to participate. This helps shift neighbourhoods from being passive recipients to active agents of change, which is critical in places where multiple domains of disadvantage are entangled and long-standing.

Policy influence embedded: Angels Connect also advocates for systemic change (income security and welfare reform), not simply service delivery – which aligns with the data showing that structural disadvantage underpins the most deprived areas and that piecemeal responses will not suffice.

—

The IMD 2025 makes plain the challenge: entrenched deprivation, multi-domain disadvantage, and geographic concentration. Tackling this requires a paradigm shift in how we design and fund interventions:

• Investment in place-based digital referral networks: Government should support the scaling of open-access platforms (such as Angels Connect) across local authority areas. These networks must be interoperable, data-informed, and locally embedded.
• Incentivise community-led frameworks: Funding programmes should reward initiatives that enable local actors to partner in delivery, co-design solutions and build local capacity, not just contract large providers.
• Embed universal advice provision: Universal welfare, debt and employment advice should be considered a core public infrastructure. Just as highways or health systems are funded universally, so too should access to advice that helps people navigate complex systems and avoid spirals of multiple disadvantage.
• Align metrics with multidimensional outcomes: Rather than measuring in narrow silos (e.g., number of food parcels delivered), policy must measure across domains –  improvements in employment, housing stability, debt resolution, mental health recovery, and community resilience. Data such as IMD 2025 should be used to map progress neighbourhood by neighbourhood.
• Link to broader policy levers: Advice networks alone won’t dismantle deprivation. They must be integrated with policy levers: employment policy, skills training, minimum incomes, housing policy, public health. For example, the IMD shows that in many of the most deprived districts the employment domain and income domain overlap heavily.

The latest IMD 2025 data holds up a mirror to our society: neighbourhoods where disadvantage is not fleeting but enduring; where multiple domains stack to create systemic inequality; where policy failure is reflected in postcode maps as much as in human lives. But data alone is a mirror, not a cure.

The pathway forward lies in democratising access to the tools people need to navigate, recover and avoid crisis – open platforms, community networks, digital referrals, advice ecosystems. Angels Connect offers a blueprint for how this might work in practice: empowering communities, connecting people to life-changing advice, combining immediate support with advocacy and capacity-building.

In policy terms, scaling this model is not optional, it is necessary. If we are serious about eradicating poverty, tackling inequality, and interrupting the generational cycles mapped by the IMD, we must invest in models that are open, inclusive and rooted in community agency. The agenda is clear: data + democracy = durable change. It is time for policy to meet practice, and for communities to lead the transformation.