Village · 126 residents
Fair · better than 1 in 10 villages
Check Local Score out of 100 · 60 is typical for the country
Each arc is a topic, coloured by its score
Map outline: Civil parish boundary
Wramplingham scores 52/100 overall, which the scorecard rates as fair — 60 is typical for the country.
It stands out for safety (87) and affordability (77).
It scores lowest on transport (31) and health (35).
Scores come from official data on safety, schools, transport, prices, health, food & drink and the local environment, for Wramplingham in East of England, each measured against the national average.
Wramplingham is scattered rather than built-up: a handful of lanes, farmhouses and detached homes with hedgerows for boundaries rather than pavements, and barely enough density to call it a settlement at all. This is the kind of place where you notice a car passing, not because it's remarkable, but because there's so little else moving. It reads as retirement- and established-family territory rather than a starter-home spot — the median age sits well over fifty, more than a decade above the national figure, and the streetscape backs that up: solid detached houses, bought outright, not flipped.
There's no rail station or notable school inside the village itself, and that absence matters more here than in most places — Connectivity and Transport both grade towards the lower end, which for a household without a car is a genuine limiter rather than a minor inconvenience. The one sampled school, Barford Primary, is rated Requires Improvement, so families weighing schooling will want to look at options beyond the village line rather than assume the nearest option is the right one. Housing itself is a different story: this is Freehold, detached-dominated stock — every recorded sale in the local sample was freehold — and a £320,000 median price that sits close to the national median but comfortably above the wider South Norfolk district, roughly 8% pricier than the surrounding area. Affordability still grades strongly nationally, mostly because incomes here sit at the very top decile; it's less that property is cheap, more that the people buying it aren't stretched.
Green space is thin on paper — a single named plot under half a hectare — which tells you Wramplingham isn't a walking-to-the-park kind of village; you're more likely to be driving to Norwich or a neighbouring village for a proper day out, or just using your own garden. Health outcomes and environment both grade solidly in the B range, consistent with an older, settled population rather than anything clinical. Safety is the real standout: an A+ grade and a flat trend, though it's worth reading the three recorded incidents in context — with a population this small, even a handful of crimes produces a skewed percentage breakdown (violence and sexual offences showing as the majority category), so treat the share figures as noise rather than a pattern. There isn't enough happening here, in the crime data or otherwise, to suggest instability — quite the opposite.
This suits someone who has already decided they want quiet over convenience: an established couple or retiree with a car, unbothered by the absence of a local station, pub, or school on the doorstep, who values a low-crime, high-income, low-density pocket of Norfolk over easy transport links. If you need walkable amenities, schools nearby, or a rail commute, this isn't shaped for you; if you want space, quiet and are prepared to travel for the rest, it delivers exactly that.
Data last updated: 19 October 2026
Pick another area to line them up side by side — the verdict, both Check Local Scores, and what actually separates them.