Housing and homelessness: every metropolitan borough ranked by spend per resident
35 councils · median £32.74/person · mean £36.24/person. From MHCLG Revenue Outturn 2024-25.
| Rank | Council | Control | Seats | Population | Total spend | Per resident | vs median |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Manchester | Green | 589,670 | £76.4m | £129.50 | +296% | |
| 2 | Liverpool | Lab | 508,961 | £51.6m | £101.48 | +210% | |
| 3 | Oldham | Ref | 251,560 | £14.1m | £56.00 | +71% | |
| 4 | Kirklees | Ref | — | 447,847 | £22.5m | £50.28 | +54% |
| 5 | Newcastle upon Tyne | LD | — | 320,605 | £14.9m | £46.48 | +42% |
| 6 | Coventry | Ref | — | 369,026 | £17.0m | £46.09 | +41% |
| 7 | Salford | Ref | 294,348 | £13.5m | £45.72 | +40% | |
| 8 | Sheffield | Ref | 582,493 | £26.2m | £45.00 | +37% | |
| 9 | Wirral | Lab | 328,873 | £14.3m | £43.38 | +32% | |
| 10 | Walsall | Ref | — | 295,678 | £12.4m | £41.94 | +28% |
| 11 | Wigan | Ref | 344,922 | £13.7m | £39.58 | +21% | |
| 12 | Tameside | Ref | 239,643 | £8.9m | £37.30 | +14% | |
| 13 | Solihull | Con | — | 221,242 | £8.0m | £35.99 | +10% |
| 14 | Calderdale | Ref | — | 210,929 | £7.4m | £35.25 | +8% |
| 15 | Bury | Lab | 198,921 | £7.0m | £35.13 | +7% | |
| 16 | Wakefield | Ref | — | 367,666 | £12.8m | £34.86 | +6% |
| 17 | Wolverhampton | Ref | 281,251 | £9.3m | £33.04 | +1% | |
| 18 | Bradford | Ref | — | 563,605 | £18.5m | £32.74 | 0% |
| 19 | North Tyneside | Ref | 215,025 | £7.0m | £32.35 | -1% | |
| 20 | Gateshead | Ref | — | 202,760 | £6.5m | £32.13 | -2% |
| 21 | Rochdale | Ref | 235,561 | £7.4m | £31.54 | -4% | |
| 22 | Bolton | Ref | 310,085 | £9.8m | £31.53 | -4% | |
| 23 | Sefton | Lab | — | 286,281 | £8.7m | £30.48 | -7% |
| 24 | Sunderland | Ref | — | 288,606 | £7.5m | £25.90 | -21% |
| 25 | Doncaster | Ref | 319,765 | £8.1m | £25.34 | -23% | |
| 26 | St. Helens | Ref | 188,861 | £4.6m | £24.25 | -26% | |
| 27 | Leeds | Ref | 845,189 | £20.0m | £23.68 | -28% | |
| 28 | Knowsley | Ind | 162,565 | £3.5m | £21.68 | -34% | |
| 29 | Rotherham | Lab | 276,595 | £5.5m | £19.78 | -40% | |
| 30 | Barnsley | Ref | 251,770 | £3.9m | £15.47 | -53% | |
| 31 | Stockport | LD | 303,929 | £4.2m | £13.82 | -58% | |
| 32 | Trafford | Lab | 241,025 | £3.3m | £13.50 | -59% | |
| 33 | Dudley | Ref | 331,930 | £4.4m | £13.12 | -60% | |
| 34 | Sandwell | Ref | — | 353,860 | £4.3m | £12.23 | -63% |
| 35 | South Tyneside | Ref | — | 151,393 | £1.8m | £11.67 | -64% |
What this shows. Net revenue expenditure on the housing and homelessness bucket from each council’s 2024-25 Revenue Outturn (RO) submission to MHCLG, divided by ONS mid-year population. Higher per-head doesn’t imply waste — it can reflect demographic need (e.g. more older residents), rurality, or policy choice (e.g. retaining in-house services rather than contracting out). Lower per-head doesn’t imply efficiency — some councils have moved costs to fees, grants, or a ringfenced account.
Caveats. Councils under MHCLG suppression for 2024-25 don’t appear here (Birmingham, Slough, Cumberland and others — see their council card for the reason). Comparisons across the tier line don’t make sense, which is why this table is filtered to one council type at a time. Source: MHCLG Local Authority Revenue Expenditure and Financing.