Rankings · Metropolitan borough
Liverpool
Likely range 53rd–65th. Stays in the bottom quarter in 97% of re-runs. How we work this out
How Liverpool scores
Bar length shows the share of the 68 councils that Liverpool beats. Overall weights: service quality 60%, value for money 20%, financial health 20%.
Service quality
Planning
| Measure | Liverpool | Median of 68 | Rank | Period |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Major planning decisions made in time (24 months)Higher is better | 86.0% | 94.5% | 63 / 68 | 2024 Q3 to 2026 Q2 |
| Non-major planning decisions made in time (24 months)Higher is better | 90.8% | 93.1% | 45 / 68 | 2024 Q3 to 2026 Q2 |
| Planning decisions in the financial yearHigher is better · context only | 1,478 | 1,247 | – | 2025-26 |
Source: MHCLG — Planning application statistics (PS2)
Waste & recycling
| Measure | Liverpool | Median of 68 | Rank | Period |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Household waste sent for reuse recycling or compostingHigher is better | 17.9% | 32.9% | =65 / 68 | 2024-25 |
| Residual household waste per householdLower is better | 594 kg | 504 kg | 58 / 68 | 2024-25 |
Source: DEFRA — Local authority collected waste management
Complaints
| Measure | Liverpool | Median of 68 | Rank | Period |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ombudsman upheld decisions per 100k residentsLower is better | 4.1 | 5.6 | 24 / 68 | 2024-25 to 2025-26 |
| Ombudsman investigations upheldLower is better | 80.8% | 82.4% | =25 / 68 | 2024-25 to 2025-26 |
| Ombudsman recommendations implemented on timeHigher is better | 93.3% | 74.7% | =12 / 68 | 2025-26 |
| Ombudsman recommendations implementedHigher is better · context only | 100.0% | 100.0% | – | 2025-26 |
| Upheld complaints already remedied by the council before reaching the OmbudsmanHigher is better · context only | 26.3% | 15.2% | – | 2025-26 |
Source: Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman — annual review data
Children's services
| Measure | Liverpool | Median of 68 | Rank | Period |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ofsted overall effectiveness (children's services)Higher is better | Inadequate | Good | =63 / 68 | latest at 2026-03-31 |
| Ofsted sub-judgements (average)Higher is better | 1.25 / 4 | Good | =65 / 68 | latest at 2026-03-31 |
Source: Ofsted — Local authority inspection outcomes
Adult social care
| Measure | Liverpool | Median of 68 | Rank | Period |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quality of life of people who use services (adjusted)Higher is better | 0.421 | 0.416 | =28 / 68 | 2024-25 |
| People who use services satisfied with their care and supportHigher is better | 68.6% | 63.0% | 8 / 68 | 2024-25 |
| Older people still at home 12 weeks after hospital discharge into reablementHigher is better | 60.0% | 62.9% | 44 / 64 | 2024-25 |
| People receiving long-term support who live in their own home or with familyHigher is better | 74.4% | 84.6% | 60 / 67 | 2024-25 |
| People who use services who feel safeHigher is better | 74.1% | 69.8% | 13 / 68 | 2024-25 |
Source: DHSC — Adult Social Care Outcomes Framework
Special educational needs
| Measure | Liverpool | Median of 68 | Rank | Period |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| New EHC plans issued within 20 weeksHigher is better | 97.6% | 68.3% | 6 / 68 | 2024 to 2025 |
Source: DfE — Education, health and care plans
Homelessness
| Measure | Liverpool | Median of 68 | Rank | Period |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Homelessness prevented: accommodation secured for 6+ monthsHigher is better | 37.5% | 51.5% | 61 / 68 | 2025-09 to 2026-03 |
| Homelessness relieved: accommodation secured for 6+ monthsHigher is better | 20.3% | 31.2% | 58 / 68 | 2025-09 to 2026-03 |
| Households in temporary accommodation per 1000 householdsLower is better | 8.4 | 7.0 | 37 / 68 | 2026-03 |
| Families with children in B&B for more than 6 weeksLower is better · context only | 3 | 0 | – | 2026-03 |
Value for money
Adult social care value for money
Liverpool spends £747 per adult on adult social care, against about £663 expected after allowing for older people's poverty, how many residents are over 65 and whether a council is in London (£84 more). Its adult social care results rank 23rd of 68.
Good results, higher cost · value for money rank 61st of 66
Children's services value for money
Liverpool spends £2,060 per child on children's services, against about £1,699 expected after allowing for child poverty and whether a council is in London (£361 more). Its children's services results rank 65th of 68.
Weaker results, higher cost · value for money rank 53rd of 66
Waste value for money
Liverpool spends £202 per home on waste & recycling, against about £197 expected after allowing for deprivation and whether a council is in London (£5 more). Its waste & recycling results rank 67th of 68.
Weaker results, higher cost · value for money rank 40th of 66
Planning value for money
Liverpool spends £873 per planning decision on planning, against about £632 expected after allowing for whether a council is in London (£240 more). Its planning results rank 59th of 68.
Weaker results, higher cost · value for money rank 37th of 66
Financial health
Reserves
| Measure | Liverpool | Median of 68 | Rank | Period |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Usable reserves as a share of net revenue expenditureHigher is better | 13.1% | 34.7% | =63 / 66 | 2025-26 |
| Change in usable reserves over the year as a share of net revenue expenditureHigher is better | 0.5% | 0.3% | 30 / 66 | 2025-26 |
Source: Calculated from MHCLG Revenue Outturn, ONS population, MHCLG dwelling stock and planning statistics
Debt costs
| Measure | Liverpool | Median of 68 | Rank | Period |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt servicing costs as a share of net revenue expenditureLower is better | 9.0% | 9.3% | 33 / 66 | 2025-26 |
Source: Calculated from MHCLG Revenue Outturn, ONS population, MHCLG dwelling stock and planning statistics
Schools funding deficit
| Measure | Liverpool | Median of 68 | Rank | Period |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| High-needs (DSG) deficit as a share of net revenue expenditureLower is better | 1.2% | 8.0% | 11 / 66 | 2025-26 |
Source: Calculated from MHCLG Revenue Outturn, ONS population, MHCLG dwelling stock and planning statistics
Government bailouts
| Measure | Liverpool | Median of 68 | Rank | Period |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Exceptional Financial Support over three years as a share of net revenue expenditureLower is better | 0.0% | 0.0% | =1 / 66 | 2024-25 to 2026-27 |
Source: Calculated from MHCLG Revenue Outturn, ONS population, MHCLG dwelling stock and planning statistics
Context
Background figures. These don't count towards the score.
| Population | 507,915 | median 296,363 | mid-2025 |
| Net service spend per resident | £2,662.66 | median £2,139.02 | 2025-26 |
| Index of Multiple Deprivation average score | 37.110 | median 26.299 | 2025 |
| Families with children in B&B for more than 6 weeks | 3 | median 0 | 2026-03 |
| Band D council tax (council element) | £2,254.37 | median £1,884.22 | 2026-27 |
| Band D council tax change on previous year | 5.0% | median 5.0% | 2026-27 |
| Band D council tax total bill (incl. GLA/police/fire/combined authority) | £2,673.59 | median £2,319.87 | 2026-27 |
What residents say
Ratings from signed-in visitors. They are shown here for context and are not part of the official-data ranking.
Loading ratings…
Rate Liverpool
Loading…
Also responsible in Liverpool
These services are run by other bodies, so they don't count towards Liverpool's score.
- Liverpool City Region Combined Authority: transport; adult skills; economic development
- Merseyside Recycling and Waste Authority: waste disposal
ONS code E08000012 · How we score