Public health: every county council ranked by spend per resident
21 councils · median £50.21/person · mean £52.51/person. From MHCLG Revenue Outturn 2024-25.
| Rank | Council | Control | Seats | Population | Total spend | Per resident | vs median |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lancashire | — | — | 1,294,914 | £97.6m | £75.40 | +50% |
| 2 | Derbyshire | — | — | 822,377 | £55.9m | £68.02 | +35% |
| 3 | East Sussex | — | — | 560,882 | £37.1m | £66.10 | +32% |
| 4 | Worcestershire | — | — | 621,360 | £37.5m | £60.40 | +20% |
| 5 | Nottinghamshire | — | — | 857,013 | £50.0m | £58.33 | +16% |
| 6 | Norfolk | — | — | 940,359 | £51.8m | £55.06 | +10% |
| 7 | Essex | — | — | 1,563,365 | £85.0m | £54.38 | +8% |
| 8 | Kent | — | — | 1,639,029 | £88.3m | £53.88 | +7% |
| 9 | Oxfordshire | — | — | 763,218 | £39.1m | £51.21 | +2% |
| 10 | West Sussex | — | — | 915,037 | £46.2m | £50.50 | +1% |
| 11 | Hertfordshire | — | — | 1,236,191 | £62.1m | £50.21 | 0% |
| 12 | Cambridgeshire | — | — | 710,317 | £35.6m | £50.08 | -0% |
| 13 | Suffolk | — | — | 786,231 | £39.2m | £49.81 | -1% |
| 14 | Lincolnshire | — | — | 789,502 | £38.6m | £48.84 | -3% |
| 15 | Hampshire | — | — | 1,447,214 | £69.7m | £48.19 | -4% |
| 16 | Gloucestershire | — | — | 669,380 | £31.0m | £46.32 | -8% |
| 17 | Staffordshire | — | — | 907,153 | £41.1m | £45.28 | -10% |
| 18 | Warwickshire | — | — | 632,207 | £28.3m | £44.80 | -11% |
| 19 | Devon | — | — | 842,313 | £37.7m | £44.79 | -11% |
| 20 | Leicestershire | — | — | 745,573 | £33.3m | £44.60 | -11% |
| 21 | Surrey | — | — | 1,248,649 | £45.7m | £36.58 | -27% |
What this shows. Net revenue expenditure on the public health 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.