Housing and homelessness: every unitary authoritie ranked by spend per resident
61 councils · median £35.57/person · mean £40.89/person. From MHCLG Revenue Outturn 2024-25.
| Rank | Council | Control | Seats | Population | Total spend | Per resident | vs median |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Portsmouth | LD | 214,321 | £22.9m | £106.65 | +200% | |
| 2 | Bedford | Con | 194,976 | £20.3m | £104.00 | +192% | |
| 3 | Brighton and Hove | Lab | 283,870 | £28.9m | £101.72 | +186% | |
| 4 | Leicester | Lab | 388,348 | £31.2m | £80.35 | +126% | |
| 5 | Nottingham | Lab | 331,077 | £25.2m | £76.11 | +114% | |
| 6 | Windsor and Maidenhead | LD | 158,943 | £12.0m | £75.30 | +112% | |
| 7 | Cornwall | Ref | 583,289 | £42.4m | £72.68 | +104% | |
| 8 | Bristol, City of | Green | 494,399 | £33.7m | £68.16 | +92% | |
| 9 | Luton | Lab | 239,090 | £16.0m | £66.73 | +88% | |
| 10 | Milton Keynes | LD | — | 305,884 | £19.1m | £62.53 | +76% |
| 11 | Reading | Green | 182,907 | £10.7m | £58.73 | +65% | |
| 12 | Medway | Lab | 292,655 | £16.3m | £55.67 | +57% | |
| 13 | Southampton | Ref | 259,424 | £14.3m | £55.04 | +55% | |
| 14 | Torbay | Con | 140,126 | £7.3m | £52.45 | +47% | |
| 15 | Southend-on-Sea | Ref | 185,256 | £9.6m | £52.07 | +46% | |
| 16 | Kingston upon Hull, City of | Ref | 275,401 | £14.3m | £51.96 | +46% | |
| 17 | Herefordshire, County of | Con | 191,047 | £9.5m | £49.58 | +39% | |
| 18 | Middlesbrough | Lab | 156,161 | £7.7m | £49.09 | +38% | |
| 19 | Isle of Wight | Ref | 141,660 | £6.9m | £48.82 | +37% | |
| 20 | Plymouth | Ref | 272,067 | £13.2m | £48.37 | +36% | |
| 21 | West Northamptonshire | Ref | — | 439,811 | £20.9m | £47.51 | +34% |
| 22 | North East Lincolnshire | Ref | 159,911 | £7.3m | £45.42 | +28% | |
| 23 | Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole | LD | 408,967 | £18.0m | £43.98 | +24% | |
| 24 | Stoke-on-Trent | Lab | 270,425 | £11.5m | £42.38 | +19% | |
| 25 | Bath and North East Somerset | LD | 200,028 | £8.1m | £40.35 | +13% | |
| 26 | County Durham | Lab | 538,011 | £20.8m | £38.57 | +8% | |
| 27 | Somerset | LD | 588,328 | £22.6m | £38.45 | +8% | |
| 28 | Peterborough | Con | 223,655 | £8.4m | £37.78 | +6% | |
| 29 | West Berkshire | LD | 165,112 | £6.1m | £37.15 | +4% | |
| 30 | Blackpool | Lab | 144,191 | £5.2m | £35.75 | +1% | |
| 31 | Thurrock | Ref | — | 180,989 | £6.4m | £35.57 | 0% |
| 32 | York | Lab | 209,301 | £7.0m | £33.67 | -5% | |
| 33 | Bracknell Forest | Lab | 130,806 | £4.3m | £33.03 | -7% | |
| 34 | Darlington | Lab | 112,489 | £3.6m | £31.73 | -11% | |
| 35 | North Lincolnshire | Con | 171,336 | £5.3m | £31.10 | -13% | |
| 36 | Wiltshire | LD | 523,700 | £15.8m | £30.19 | -15% | |
| 37 | Dorset | LD | 389,947 | £11.5m | £29.46 | -17% | |
| 38 | Hartlepool | Ref | 98,180 | £2.9m | £29.06 | -18% | |
| 39 | Derby | Lab | 274,149 | £7.9m | £28.94 | -19% | |
| 40 | Blackburn with Darwen | Ref | 162,540 | £4.7m | £28.72 | -19% | |
| 41 | North Somerset | Con | 224,578 | £6.4m | £28.38 | -20% | |
| 42 | Buckinghamshire | Con | 578,772 | £16.3m | £28.15 | -21% | |
| 43 | Central Bedfordshire | Ind | 315,877 | £8.6m | £27.37 | -23% | |
| 44 | Cheshire West and Chester | Lab | 371,652 | £10.0m | £26.85 | -25% | |
| 45 | Shropshire | Con | 332,455 | £8.4m | £25.39 | -29% | |
| 46 | Halton | Ref | 131,543 | £3.3m | £25.23 | -29% | |
| 47 | Warrington | Lab | 215,391 | £5.4m | £24.94 | -30% | |
| 48 | Cheshire East | Con | 421,298 | £10.3m | £24.56 | -31% | |
| 49 | Stockton-on-Tees | Con | 206,800 | £5.0m | £24.02 | -32% | |
| 50 | North Yorkshire | Con | 635,270 | £15.1m | £23.74 | -33% | |
| 51 | South Gloucestershire | Con | 306,332 | £6.4m | £20.93 | -41% | |
| 52 | Telford and Wrekin | Lab | 195,952 | £4.1m | £20.90 | -41% | |
| 53 | Rutland | LD | 41,443 | £0.8m | £20.51 | -42% | |
| 54 | Northumberland | Con | 331,420 | £6.5m | £19.52 | -45% | |
| 55 | Wokingham | LD | 187,200 | £3.5m | £18.58 | -48% | |
| 56 | Redcar and Cleveland | Lab | 139,228 | £2.3m | £16.55 | -53% | |
| 57 | Westmorland and Furness | LD | 230,185 | £3.6m | £15.50 | -56% | |
| 58 | Swindon | Con | — | 243,875 | £3.7m | £15.24 | -57% |
| 59 | Isles of Scilly | Ind | 2,366 | £0.0m | £13.95 | -61% | |
| 60 | East Riding of Yorkshire | Con | 355,884 | £3.7m | £10.39 | -71% | |
| 61 | North Northamptonshire | Con | 373,871 | £3.2m | £8.47 | -76% |
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.