Public health: every shire district ranked by spend per resident
38 councils · median £0.69/person · mean £0.88/person. From MHCLG Revenue Outturn 2024-25.
| Rank | Council | Control | Seats | Population | Total spend | Per resident | vs median |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Epsom and Ewell | RES | 83,288 | £0.3m | £3.89 | +464% | |
| 2 | Chichester | LD | 128,934 | £0.4m | £3.02 | +338% | |
| 3 | Boston | BOS | 71,080 | £0.2m | £2.48 | +259% | |
| 4 | Norwich | Green | 147,182 | £0.3m | £2.36 | +242% | |
| 5 | Harborough | Con | 104,713 | £0.2m | £1.92 | +178% | |
| 6 | Maidstone | Con | 187,767 | £0.3m | £1.78 | +158% | |
| 7 | Hyndburn | Ref | 86,058 | £0.1m | £1.51 | +119% | |
| 8 | Wychavon | Con | 138,017 | £0.2m | £1.30 | +88% | |
| 9 | Horsham | LD | 151,521 | £0.2m | £1.28 | +86% | |
| 10 | North Hertfordshire | Con | 137,201 | £0.2m | £1.24 | +80% | |
| 11 | Mid Sussex | LD | 161,755 | £0.2m | £1.20 | +74% | |
| 12 | Epping Forest | Ref | 137,451 | £0.2m | £1.13 | +64% | |
| 13 | Blaby | Con | 108,165 | £0.1m | £1.08 | +57% | |
| 14 | South Ribble | Lab | 116,113 | £0.1m | £0.95 | +38% | |
| 15 | Uttlesford | RES | 95,106 | £0.1m | £0.79 | +14% | |
| 16 | Tandridge | LD | 90,586 | £0.1m | £0.77 | +12% | |
| 17 | Chorley | Ref | 120,839 | £0.1m | £0.77 | +12% | |
| 18 | New Forest | Con | 176,116 | £0.1m | £0.76 | +10% | |
| 19 | Gravesham | Lab | 110,671 | £0.1m | £0.72 | +4% | |
| 20 | Preston | LD | 162,864 | £0.1m | £0.66 | -4% | |
| 21 | South Staffordshire | Con | 114,423 | £0.1m | £0.62 | -10% | |
| 22 | Swale | Lab | 158,379 | £0.1m | £0.52 | -25% | |
| 23 | Tendring | Con | 156,759 | £0.1m | £0.52 | -25% | |
| 24 | Tonbridge and Malling | Con | 136,853 | £0.1m | £0.47 | -32% | |
| 25 | Sevenoaks | Con | 122,748 | £0.1m | £0.47 | -32% | |
| 26 | Dartford | Con | 125,011 | £0.1m | £0.44 | -36% | |
| 27 | Bolsover | Lab | 83,773 | £0.0m | £0.38 | -45% | |
| 28 | Broxbourne | Con | 101,900 | £0.0m | £0.29 | -58% | |
| 29 | Mid Suffolk | Green | 110,775 | £0.0m | £0.23 | -67% | |
| 30 | Ashford | Con | 140,936 | £0.0m | £0.23 | -67% | |
| 31 | East Suffolk | Green | 249,664 | £0.0m | £0.18 | -74% | |
| 32 | Babergh | Green | 97,033 | £0.0m | £0.13 | -81% | |
| 33 | Rugby | LD | 122,378 | £0.0m | £0.05 | -93% | |
| 34 | Brentwood | Ref | 79,326 | £0.0m | £0.03 | -96% | |
| 35 | Lincoln | Ref | 105,114 | £0.0m | £0.01 | -99% | |
| 36 | Fenland | Con | 104,896 | £-0.0m | £-0.05 | -107% | |
| 37 | Wyre Forest | Con | 103,913 | £-0.0m | £-0.17 | -125% | |
| 38 | St Albans | LD | 151,012 | £-0.1m | £-0.56 | -181% |
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.