This page provides an overview of social care in Leeds, along with key metrics that could affect social care. Understanding these metrics is important because they help contextualise the challenges with social care provision in each local authority. These statistics are important to keep in mind when reviewing the other pages.
Why are these metrics important? Population size and density can affect the demand for social care services. For example, if a local authority has a high population (relative to other areas), it may need to allocate more resources to meet care needs. Similarly, areas with high population density may require more care services due to the increased number of people living in close proximity. Inversely, areas with a low population density may have fewer care needs, but residents may face challenges accessing services due to the distance between them. Lastly, people in rural areas might live further away from services, which can impact their ability to access care, or make it more expensive to provide.
Understanding these metrics can help local authorities plan and allocate resources effectively.
Deprivation decile is a measure of the level of deprivation in a local authority. It is calculated by ranking areas in England from 1 (most deprived) to 10 (least deprived) based on factors such as income, employment, education, and health. A higher decile indicates lower levels of deprivation, while a lower decile suggests higher levels of deprivation. Understanding deprivation levels can help local authorities identify areas that may require additional support and resources to address social care needs.
Deprivation rank is a measure of the relative deprivation of a local authority compared to other areas in England. It is calculated by ranking areas from 1 (most deprived) to 32,844 (least deprived) Lower Layer Super Output Areas (LSOA), which can be thought of as “small areas”. This rank is based on factors such as income, employment, education, and health. A lower rank indicates higher levels of deprivation, while a higher rank suggests lower levels of deprivation. Understanding deprivation ranks can help local authorities identify areas that may require additional support and resources to address social care needs.
Many people want care, some receive care, but a significant number go without. What types of care are being requested? What care is actually provided? This section explores the gap between need and provision, the types of care available, and how our own data contributes to the understanding of these challenges.
Access Social Care and other Helplines providers are working to bridge this gap by providing free legal support to people who are struggling to access social care services. This first chart illustrates the types of calls we are getting.
The rest of this page distingushes between the different types of care provided to Working Age People and Older People, as we are able to disaggregate at a greater level of granularity.
Note: these values are a work in progress… expect these numbers to go up
This plot shows a breakdown of the types of requests for assistance received by Access Social Care and other helplines. Understanding the themes of these calls can identify areas where additional support and resources may be needed. For example, a high number of calls related to housing may indicate a need for more affordable housing options, while a high number of calls related to social care assessments may suggest a need for improved access to care services. The request types are:
Assessments: An assessment is a meeting or form to find out what help someone needs with daily tasks.
Care Plan: A care plan is a written agreement that lists the support you’ll get and who to contact if things change.
Carers: Carers are people who help a disabled or ill person with daily tasks.
Charging: Charging refers to checking if you can afford to pay for some of your care based on your savings.
Information Seeking: Information seeking means getting advice about available care options.
Legal Issues and Complaints: Legal issues and complaints involve reporting problems with your care to the council or an ombudsman.
Safeguarding: Safeguarding is protecting people from abuse or neglect.
Of course, high numbers also mean that people know where to call, and this number can be impacted by advocacy efforts. As a counterpoint, areas with low numbers may indicate a lack of awareness of available services or a need for more outreach to connect people with support.
To protect privacy, our minimum bin size is 5, which means that if we field 1-5 queries on a topic, we display 5.
Are you a helpline and would like to combine data resources? Let us know!
Access Social Care casework, AccessAva data, and helpline partner submissions
Working Age People
Knowing how many people are requesting social care, how many people are recieving care and what percent of people are disabled helps understand need and social care provision at a top level. For example, a high number of people requesting care may indicate a need for additional resources or services, while a low number of people receiving care may suggest a gap in service provision. Understanding these metrics can help identify areas where additional support may be needed.
MW was diagnosed with Functional Chronic Pain, she cannot walk without support, she holds on to her furniture to move around the house. She uses a wheelchair, especially when she goes out, with support from friends and family. She lives on second floor with 5 flights because of the way the building is designed and there is no lift. She never goes out because of the difficulties she experiences with the stairs. She needs help with cooking, cleaning, shopping and showering. She relies on friends and her mum who has knee replacement.
She was referred by the Social Prescriber who referred her onto also referred her to Croydon Adult Support, they told her they are short of staff to allocate her a social worker, so she was placed on a long waiting list. MW case still hadn’t progressed until the Social Prescriber, who had been recently trained on the Care Act, referred her to Access Social Care’s free legal Chatbot letter clinic.
The legal clinic volunteer completed a letter to Croydon Council with MW within a week which was sent to Adult Social Services. Access Social Care then called her after two weeks to complete a follow up survey. MW informed them that she had had an assessment and was waiting to hear back from Croydon following the panel meeting. Social Services has now done the assessment after which the panel offered MW 9 hours of social care support.
This case study is based on real data from Croydon. Have a story to tell? Let us know, and we might display it here!
This plot shows the types of care provided to working-age people in Leeds. Understanding the types of care available can help local authorities identify areas where additional support and resources may be needed. For example, a high number of people receiving personal care may indicate a need for more support with daily living activities, while a high number of people receiving respite care may suggest a need for additional support for carers.
ASCFR and SALT Data Tables 2023-24 Sheet T34
The age-standardised rate of disability in Leeds is 18 %. The England average is 17.6 %. Leeds therefore has a slightly larger share of disabled people. Population growth has been steady, rising from about 805,000 in 2019 to more than 829,000 in 2023. More people, combined with a higher disability rate, pushes up demand for help.
In 2024 almost 10,600 working-age adults asked the council for care. That is 1,276 requests for every 100,000 residents, around 12 % above the national norm of 1,143. A high request rate fits the local picture of greater deprivation (mean decile 4.8 against 5.9 for England) and of wide gaps between rich and poor. Poorer health, insecure work and earlier onset of long-term illness often drive people to seek help sooner.
Only 4,275 working-age adults were actually receiving long-term care in the same year. This is 515 people per 100,000, slightly below the national figure of 533. In other words, Leeds records more enquiries but ends up supporting a slightly smaller share of its population. The gap may mean that some requests are resolved by advice or short-term help, yet it could also hint at unmet need if people drop out after assessment.
A closer look shows that 19 per 100,000 adults are in nursing homes, well above the England rate of 14. Leeds therefore appears to reserve places for the most complex cases. Residential placements are close to average. Community support shows a mixed pattern. Only 60 per 100,000 depend solely on direct payments, only half the national level. By contrast, 309 per 100,000 receive a council-managed personal budget, higher than the England mean of 267. This suggests that many residents prefer, or are guided towards, the council managing their package rather than handling the money themselves. Commissioned support without a budget is low (20 versus 58 per 100,000), again pointing to a local model that centres on managed budgets.
Data for 2025 show very small numbers asking for help with assessments (0.8 per 100,000) or mental capacity issues (0.1 per 100,000), both below national norms. Requests about charging for services and general information are in line with England. Lower rates may reflect effective online guidance, but they could also mean that some people who would benefit do not know where to turn.
Leeds is a large, moderately dense and relatively deprived city. These factors raise the risk of disability and increase pressure on adult social care. High request levels confirm that pressure. Yet a lower-than-average receipt rate and a strong tilt towards council-managed budgets indicate a cautious approach to allocating long-term support. The city may need to check whether people whose requests are declined still find suitable help elsewhere. Extra effort to promote direct payments might also give disabled people more choice and control.
Rising population and above-average disability levels mean demand is likely to keep growing. Leeds should plan for more nursing and complex care places while widening community options. Targeted outreach in deprived neighbourhoods, where health problems start earlier, could prevent crises and reduce costly placements. Finally, clearer information channels may lift the low numbers seeking advice on assessment and mental capacity, helping residents to make informed choices.
✨ ✅ ❌Older People
Just like with Working Age people, knowing how many older people are requesting social care, how many people are recieving care and what percent of the population is 65+ helps understand need and social care provision at a top level.
Jamaican female, blind and in her 40s. She was in an emergency Bed & Breakfast with her Niece, who acts as her unofficial carer, she is unable to work but would like to go to University. She is receiving PIP but not the Daily Living Allowance which she applied for in June 2021. She is vulnerable and has a history of self harm so was assigned a rehab Support Worker. Vanessa supported her using the Chatbot to chase up her PIP Daily Living allowance application, after waiting for several months and they received a reply within a week but was awarded the lower rate.
Another Chatbot letter was sent to request an urgent assessment due to her vulnerability and this was action quickly by the LA. Vanessa also supported her to use the chatbot and ask the Social worker to be moved to a place that supports her needs and rights. As she was having to use a shared bathroom, toilet and kitchen in a place with drug/alcohol abusers and being blind with no carer, this left her vulnerable. The Chatbot was used again to raise this issue and after a few weeks she was successfully moved to a private property in another area.
This case study is based on real data from Croydon. Have a story to tell? Let us know, and we might display it here!
As above, it is important to see what type of care older people are being provided because it can help explain where additional work is needed.
ASCFR and SALT Data Tables 2023-24 Sheet T34
Leeds is growing quickly, from 805 000 people in 2019 to about 829 000 in 2023. Even so, the share of residents aged 65 plus is modest. It has stayed close to 15.7 per cent across the last five years, well below the national figure of 18–19 per cent. Leeds is also more deprived than the England average, with a mean Index of Multiple Deprivation decile of 4.8. Deprivation often brings poorer health at a younger age, so need for support may arise earlier than the headline age profile suggests.
In 2024, 23 410 people aged 65 plus asked the council for help. This equals 2 822 requests per 100 000 older residents, around 16 per cent higher than the England rate of 2 438. The gap is striking because Leeds has a smaller older population share. The pattern points to need being driven less by age itself and more by linked factors such as long-term illness, deprivation, housing quality, and the city’s largely urban character, which can make informal support networks weaker.
Leeds is supporting 7 030 older people in long-term care, 848 per 100 000. This is roughly 15 per cent below the national figure of 1 003 per 100 000. The city therefore converts a higher level of requests into a lower level of services than most areas. The shortfall is clearest in community packages that are fully commissioned by the council (6 per 100 000 in Leeds against 137 nationally). Residential and nursing occupancy is also below average, although the gap is smaller. In contrast, direct payments stand out: 21 per 100 000 older people use a direct-payment-only package, almost double the England rate. This suggests Leeds encourages personal budgets and family-arranged care more strongly than many councils.
Small numbers of older residents seek help about charging, care plans or safeguarding. While volumes are low, the rate of charging queries (5.3 per 100 000) is almost in line with the national picture. Lower rates of assessment or carers’ enquiries could mean that written guidance is clear, or it could reflect barriers to speaking up. The council may wish to test satisfaction directly to understand whether absence of complaints equals satisfaction or unmet voice.
The combination of high demand and below-average service receipt hints at unmet need. Some requests may be resolved with information or short-term help, yet persistent deprivation and earlier onset of frailty mean that hidden need is likely. A strong use of direct payments shows policy intent to give choice, but it can also shift the burden of arranging care to families who may already feel stretched.
Looking ahead, the city’s older population share is stable but the absolute number of older residents will rise if total population growth continues. Without extra capacity, the present gap between requests and care packages may widen. Targeted investment in community support, especially council-commissioned services, could ease pressure on families and reduce later use of residential care. Work with health partners is equally important, given the link between long-term conditions and early demand for social care in more deprived urban areas.
In summary, Leeds faces an older-people challenge shaped more by poverty and health inequality than by age structure alone. Aligning resources with this reality will be vital for sustainable, person-centred support.
✨ ✅ ❌When government support falls short, unpaid carers step in to provide care. However, many struggle with burnout, financial pressure, lack of social contact, and a lack of support. This section explores the number of unpaid carers, their increasing workload, and what forms of support are available.
Carers play a vital role in supporting vulnerable adults, often stepping in to provide care when professional services are unavailable or insufficient. The percentage of carers receiving direct payments highlights financial empowerment, the number of carers accessing services reflects local authority outreach, and the number turning to charities underscores unmet needs. Together, these data points reveal systemic strengths and weaknesses: low direct payment uptake may push carers toward charities, while effective services can reduce dependence on charitable support. Understanding these metrics enables targeted interventions to ensure carers receive the recognition and resources they deserve.
Unpaid carers play a crucial role in supporting vulnerable adults, often stepping in to provide care when professional services are unavailable or insufficient. Understanding the number of unpaid carers in a local authority can be complicated. On the one hand, a relatively high proportion might be indicative of not enough being done by the local authority, and/or a strong community. On the other hand, a relatively lower number can mean good service provision, lower need, lower availability to look after family, or a problem with reporting.
Still, understanding the number of unpaid carers is a baseline number that must be considered.
NOMIS NM_2213_1
These values are widely considered to be an underestimate. See this report from Carers UK for more information.
August 2021 - Patient with dementia who lives in a shared lives setting. Carer had been requesting respite from the council since September 2020. Croydon Social Prescriber helped with a referral to the local authority in March 2021. Assessment conducted, with the promise they would come back with support, which did not happen. 25 August, social prescriber used the chatbot to find the right legal wording for the situation. The email was sent at 4.52pm that day. At 5.12pm the council contacted the carer to discuss the respite. This was the impact of one letter, addressed to a senior team.
This case study is based on real data from Croydon. Have a story to tell? Let us know, and we might display it here!
Social contact is important for carers’ well-being, as it can help reduce feelings of isolation and loneliness. Understanding the level of social contact that carers have can help local authorities identify areas where additional support and resources may be needed. For example, a low level of social contact may indicate a need for more social activities or support groups for carers, while a high level of social contact may suggest that carers have a strong support network.
Survey of Adult Carers in England (SACE) - question 11
The type of support available to carers can vary significantly, impacting their ability to provide care effectively. Understanding the types of support available can help identify areas where additional resources may be needed. For example, a high number of carers receiving respite care may indicate a need for more support with caregiving responsibilities, while a low number of carers receiving financial support may suggest a need for additional financial assistance.
ASCFR/SALT Sheet T47
Access to information is crucial for carers to navigate the social care system effectively. Understanding how easy it is for carers to get information can help local authorities identify areas where additional support and resources may be needed. For example, a high number of carers finding it difficult to get information may indicate a need for improved communication and support services, while a low number of carers finding it difficult to get information may suggest that existing services are effective.
Would you like social care information? Try our Chatbot!
Survey of Adult Carers in England (SACE) - question 17
Note: these values are a work in progress… expect these numbers to go up
Access Social Care and other Helplines help people with information, advice, and support related to social care. Understanding the types of calls received by carers can highlight areas where additional support and resources may be needed. For example, a high number of calls related to financial support may indicate a need for more financial assistance for carers, while a high number of calls related to respite care may suggest a need for additional support with caregiving responsibilities.
It is important to note that, just as in the previous section, low numbers of requests might indicate that people don’t know where to get help, don’t feel they can get (or deserve) help, or other outreach problems. This is particularly important because we often work with people where the role of a carer is not recognised, or where the carer themselves does not recognise their role.
Access Social Care casework, AccessAva data, and helpline partner submissions
In 2021 Leeds had about 61,500 unpaid carers. This equals 7,596 carers for every 100,000 residents. The national rate is higher, at 8,204 per 100,000. Leeds therefore appears to have fewer carers in relation to its population than most places in England. One reason may be the city’s age profile: Leeds is a large urban area with a slightly younger population than many shire counties, so fewer people may yet have reached the stage of providing regular care. Another reason could be under-identification. In neighbourhoods with high deprivation, caring is often hidden because residents see it as part of everyday family life rather than as a role that should be recorded or supported.
Only 29.2 percent of carers in Leeds say they have all the social contact they want. The figure is almost identical to the England average (29.3 percent), yet it still means seven carers in ten feel lonely or cut off. This is worrying for a city where community networks are thought to be strong. High population density does not always translate into social links, and the uneven pattern of deprivation in Leeds (decile spread 3.07 compared with 2.3 nationally) may leave some carers in poorer wards without the time or money to join local groups.
Fifty-eight percent of carers feel it is easy to get information about services, a shade below the national figure of 59 percent. Leeds City Council and its partners offer a great deal of web-based advice, yet the slight gap hints that information is not always reaching the right people or is not in a form they can use. Digital exclusion in deprived areas and for older carers could be a factor.
Leeds stands out for the very high use of universal, low-level help. Around 12,700 carers (1,531 per 100,000) receive information, advice or sign-posting, more than four times the national rate. Almost 2,000 carers (240 per 100,000) benefit from respite arranged for the person they look after, also well above average. In contrast, the city offers far fewer direct payments and managed personal budgets than most authorities: about 1,176 carers get a direct payment, only a quarter of the national rate, and fewer than 300 receive part direct payments or council-managed budgets. Commissioned support without a personal budget is also low.
This profile suggests a strategic choice. Leeds puts early, light-touch help within easy reach and tries to give carers a break by supporting the cared-for person. The approach keeps costs down and may suit carers with short-term or lower-level needs. However, people who require flexible, tailored help—often provided through personal budgets—may be missing out. The middling scores on social contact and information ease could reflect this gap: carers know where to ask for basic guidance, yet the service offer may not go far enough to change daily life.
The UT1 indicator for 2025 records two cases in the year, equal to 0.24 per 100,000 residents against an England average of 0.75. Although the count is tiny, it hints that serious incidents involving carers are rare in Leeds. It may also point to good preventive work, but as numbers are small, caution is needed in drawing firm conclusions.
Leeds is supporting many carers with basic, universal services, yet the city reports slightly lower satisfaction on contact and information than the scale of that support might predict. To close the gap, commissioners could explore expanding personal budgets or mixed packages, giving carers who manage complex situations more control and respite. Targeted outreach in the most deprived wards, where caring is likely under-reported, would also help bring hidden carers into the support system. With a large, urban, and socio-economically mixed population, Leeds needs a two-tier offer: broad, easy-access advice for everybody and deeper, flexible help for those with the heaviest load.
✨ ✅ ❌Care providers are essential for delivering social care services, including home care agencies and care homes. The quality of care they provide can vary significantly, impacting the well-being of service users. This section examines the number and types of care providers, their quality ratings, and some of the difficulties of maintaining high standards. Understanding these metrics is crucial for ensuring that vulnerable individuals receive high-quality care.
The number and types of care providers in a local authority can impact the availability and quality of social care services. Understanding the distribution of care providers directly influences people’s ability to get the care they need.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) rates care providers based on their quality of care, safety, and effectiveness. Understanding the quality ratings of care providers can help local authorities identify areas where additional support and resources may be needed. For example, a high number of care providers with low ratings may indicate a need for improved training and support, while a high number of care providers with high ratings may suggest that existing services are effective.
Framework rates are the agreed prices that local authorities pay care providers for social care services, such as home care and residential care. These rates are crucial because they determine the affordability, availability, and quality of care in a city. If rates are too low, providers may struggle to sustain services, leading to workforce shortages, poor care quality, and limited access for those relying on council-funded care.
Understanding framework rates helps assess whether local authorities are adequately funding social care, ensuring fair pay for care workers, and maintaining a sustainable care market that meets residents’ needs.
?
Several providers are finding it increasingly difficult to stay in business, and sometimes several providers collapse at once. For example, when pay rises are approved without consultation and effective immediately, providers may not be able to afford to pay their staff. This can cause a chain-effect which leads to collapse in the market, and a lack of care for those who need it.
?
Workforce turnover rate is a measure of the number of staff leaving a care provider over a specific period. High turnover rates can indicate issues with staff retention, such as low pay, poor working conditions, or lack of training and support. Understanding workforce turnover rates can help local authorities identify areas where additional support and resources may be needed to improve staff retention and ensure high-quality care services.
NOTE: This data series is based on regional data
Staff retention is crucial for maintaining high-quality care services. Understanding the challenges faced by care providers in retaining staff can help local authorities identify areas where additional support and resources may be needed. For example, a high number of care providers struggling to retain staff may indicate a need for improved training and support, while a low number of care providers facing retention challenges may suggest that existing services are effective.
This dataset describes the results of a survey asking care providers about their challenges in retaining staff.
NOTE: This data series is based on regional data
Workforce_survey_data_tables, Tab 6_2
Vacancy rate is a measure of the number of unfilled positions within a care provider over a specific period. High vacancy rates can indicate issues with staff recruitment, such as low pay, poor working conditions, or lack of training and support. Understanding vacancy rates can help local authorities identify areas where additional support and resources may be needed to improve staff recruitment and ensure high-quality care services.
Recruiting staff is essential for maintaining high-quality care services, and for backfilling staff when they leave. Understanding the challenges faced by care providers in recruiting staff can help local authorities identify areas where additional support and resources may be needed. For example, a high number of care providers struggling to recruit staff may indicate a need for improved training and support, or can point to a systemic problem, such as low pay, poor working conditions, or not enough people interested in this job type.
Staff recruitment is important as it’s one of the areas that have levers to pull outside of social care, for example, by changing how many visas are awarded to social care workers.
NOTE: This data series is based on regional data
Workforce_survey_data_tables, Tab 6_2
Leeds has 139 community-based adult social care services and 143 residential care homes. At first sight these numbers look high, yet the city’s population of about 830,000 is more than double the average English local authority. When the figures are set against population, Leeds offers roughly 16.8 community providers and 17.2 residential homes per 100,000 people. The community rate is almost the same as the national rate of 16.9 per 100,000, while the residential rate is well below the national 24.1 per 100,000. In practice, this means that residents are more likely to find help at home than a bed in a care home when compared with many parts of England. Given the steady population rise of 3 % since 2019 and the city’s low rural share (12 %), the tilt towards community support matches an urban pattern where short travel times make home-based services easier to organise.
While supply looks adequate, quality is a clear concern. Just over one in four Leeds providers (27.8 %) are rated as “requires improvement” or “inadequate”, far above the England average of 16.8 %. The gap suggests that many citizens may face limited choice of good-quality provision even though headline numbers appear healthy. Poor ratings can stem from staffing strain, leadership issues or the complexity of caring for people who live in more deprived areas. Leeds sits below the national mean deprivation decile (4.8 vs 5.9) and shows wide inequality across its neighbourhoods. Services in poorer districts often shoulder higher need and lower fee income, both of which can depress inspection results.
The regional workforce picture helps to explain the quality challenge. Staff turnover in Yorkshire and the Humber is 25.2 %, almost identical to the England rate, but 82.5 % of employers say recruitment is “more challenging” and 70.5 % report the same for retention, both a little above national sentiment. Vacancy rates in Leeds are slightly lower than average (8.0 % vs 8.4 %), yet filling posts is still hard, possibly because unemployment is low and care wages lag behind other urban jobs. High churn disrupts continuity of care and forces providers to rely on agency cover, factors often cited in CQC reports for lower ratings.
Leeds is a large, dense city but not as tightly packed as London or Manchester, so travel to clients is manageable and supports the focus on home-care. However, high deprivation and a diverse population raise both the volume and complexity of need. Demand may therefore be stretching the local market, especially residential homes, where the per-capita supply gap is starkest. If older or disabled residents cannot secure a local care-home bed, pressures may spill over into hospital delays or out-of-area placements.
Commissioners may wish to support quality improvement programmes, targeted first at the most deprived wards where ratings are weakest. Expanding community services further could ease demand for scarce residential places, but only if workforce issues are tackled through better pay, training and career routes. Given the city’s growth and ageing trend, a balanced approach—raising care-home capacity while lifting standards across all settings—will be vital to ensure safe, timely and person-centred care for Leeds residents.
✨ ✅ ❌Historically, hospital delays have been due in large part, to the inability to discharge patients into social care. We no longer have DTOC data, but we can still look at the number of hospital delays and the number of facilities requiring improvement.
CQC, as the regulator of health and social care services in England, is beginning to rate Local Authorities on their social care provision. Understanding the CQC rating of a local authority should be used as the most official evaluation of service care provision. For example, a low rating may indicate a need for improved service delivery, while a high rating may suggest that existing services are effective.
Hospital delays can have a significant impact on patient care and outcomes, and are in large part the result of not having invested sufficiently in social care. Understanding the number of hospital delays in a local authority can be a sympthom of a poorly working social care sector. For example, a high number of hospital delays may indicate a need for improved discharge planning and coordination, not enough places to discharge people to, lack of sufficient staff to assess patients, or a lack of care providers.
Discharge-Ready-Date-monthly-data-webfile-November-2024, Tab UTLA Acceptable
This metric illustrates how long patients are delayed in hospital before being discharged. Higher average delays mean that patients are spending more time in hospital than necessary, which can lead to increased costs, reduced bed availability, and poorer patient outcomes. This also means that the beds are not available for people that might desperately need them for life-saving procedures.
Discharge-Ready-Date-monthly-data-webfile-November-2024, Tab UTLA Acceptable
Delayed Transfer of Care (DTOC) refers to the time between a patient being declared medically fit for discharge and actually leaving the hospital. Understanding the number of DTOCs in a local authority can help identify precisely where the social care system is failing.
Unfortunately, this dataset is no longer being generated.
Reablement is a short-term service that helps people regain independence and confidence after a period of illness or injury. Understanding the number of people receiving reablement services can help local authorities identify areas where additional support and resources may be needed. For example, a high number of people receiving reablement services may indicate a need for more support with daily living activities, while a low number of people receiving reablement services may suggest that existing services are effective.
Coming soon!
Service user satisfaction is a key indicator of the quality of social care services. Understanding service user satisfaction can help local authorities identify areas where additional support and resources may be needed. For example, a low level of service user satisfaction may indicate a need for improved service delivery, while a high level of service user satisfaction may suggest that existing services are effective.
It is important to note that the people surveyed are already receiving service care. Notably absent are all the people that are not yet lucky enough to be receiving care.
Personal Social Services Adult Social Care Survey, question 1
Access to information is crucial for people using social care services to navigate the system effectively. Understanding how easy it is for people to get information can help local authorities identify areas where additional support and resources may be needed. For example, a high number of people finding it difficult to get information may indicate a need for improved communication and support services, while a low number of people finding it difficult to get information may suggest that existing services are effective.
Would you like social care information? Try our Chatbot!
Personal Social Services Adult Social Care Survey, question 13
An ombudsman is a person who has been appointed to look into complaints about companies and organisations. The number of cases received and decided by the Ombudsman is important because it provides insight into the volume of complaints about a local authority’s social care services and how effectively these complaints are being addressed. The number of cases received indicates the level of dissatisfaction or systemic issues within a council’s care provision, while the number of cases decided shows how efficiently the Ombudsman is processing and resolving complaints. A large gap between the two may suggest delays in complaint handling, leaving individuals waiting.
It is important to note that contacting the Ombudsman is widely considered a last resort, often discouraged, and sometimes penalised.
Leeds is a large urban authority of about 830,000 people. Its population is more than twice the England average and it is growing steadily. Density is moderate (1,472 residents per km²) and the city is markedly more deprived than the national norm, with wide gaps between neighbourhoods. These structural factors create high and uneven demand for adult social care and health services.
The Care Quality Commission indicator “discharges from UTLA acceptable trusts” shows only 12 per cent of Leeds residents leaving hospital into a trust judged acceptable, against a national figure of 89 per cent. This very low proportion suggests that the local hospital network is not giving Leeds citizens prompt access to beds or packages judged suitable by the regulator. Possible causes include pressure on local acute beds, limited step-down capacity, or mismatches between where people live and where beds are free.
These pressures appear to translate into slower patient flow. The share of discharges that are delayed stands at 12.8 per cent, a little above the England average of 12.3 per cent. Average delay per patient is 0.91 days, again higher than the 0.7-day benchmark. In a city with high deprivation, even small extra waits can increase risk of de-conditioning and lead to greater care packages later on. Shortening the delay curve would therefore release capacity and improve outcomes.
Sixty-two per cent of survey respondents say they are satisfied with their care and support, slightly below the national rate of 64.7 per cent. A separate NatCen question records 57 per cent dissatisfaction, hinting at a polarised experience: some people are content, while a noticeable minority feel poorly served. Lower satisfaction is consistent with high demand and resource stretch in a more deprived city.
In contrast, 71.4 per cent of people find it easy to obtain information about services, three points above the England norm. Leeds has invested in digital and neighbourhood advice hubs; these seem to be paying off. Good signposting should, in time, help people access lower-level help earlier and reduce crisis demand.
The Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman received 3.50 cases per 100,000 residents and made decisions on 2.77 cases per 100,000. Both rates sit below England averages (4.45 and 4.12 respectively). With a population more than double the average, raw complaint numbers will look large, but the per-capita rate is low. This may reflect effective early resolution by the council. However, given the lower satisfaction score, it may also indicate that some citizens are not escalating concerns, perhaps because they feel complaints will not change outcomes. Monitoring outreach in more deprived wards could clarify this.
Leeds performs relatively well on information access and keeps formal complaints low, yet struggles with hospital discharge quality and overall satisfaction. A focus on three areas could raise the quality trajectory:
First, strengthen joint planning between the Integrated Care Board, community health providers and the council to ensure more discharges go directly to CQC-acceptable settings. Second, target delayed transfers in the most deprived neighbourhoods, where even short waits can accelerate loss of independence. Third, maintain the city’s strong information offer while encouraging and supporting residents to give feedback, so hidden issues surface early.
If these actions succeed, Leeds should move its satisfaction scores closer to, or beyond, the national average while preserving its low rate of escalated complaints.
✨ ✅ ❌We need to understand how much money is being spent on social care, and what this provides. First, let’s look at values reported by local authorities.
Gross Current Expenditure (2023-24) captures the total operational cost of services, indicating overall demand and financial commitment. This includes spending on residential and non-residential care, direct payments, and other social care services. Understanding gross expenditure helps assess the scale of social care provision and financial pressures on local authorities.
ASCFR/SALT Sheet T3
This figure reflects the net cost of social care provision to the local authority, indicating the extent of financial support required to meet service demands. Understanding net expenditure helps assess the financial sustainability of social care services and the commitment level of the local authority.
ASCFR/SALT Sheet T3
Client Contributions, otherwise known as “Charging”, show the extent to which service users offset costs. Understanding client contributions helps assess the financial burden on individuals and the local authority, highlighting the need for fair and equitable funding mechanisms.
It is important to note that not all local authorities charge for social care services, and that charging can be a barrier to accessing care for some individuals.
ASCFR/SALT Sheet T3
Income from NHS reflects external funding and collaboration with the health sector. Understanding NHS contributions helps understand the level of integration between health and social care.
ASCFR/SALT Sheet T3
Budget Cuts indicate financial constraints and potential service reductions. Sometimes, budget cuts are explicit, but other times, they aren’t mentioned directly, making tracking this information difficult to access.
As such, this data is not consistently available for all local authorities.
Access Social Care have made a series of Freedom of Information requests about the government’s own assessment of sufficiency of social care funding. The social care sector is in crisis, yet the government refuses to disclose how it determines funding sufficiency. Without transparency, there is little accountability, no independent scrutiny to improve decision-making, and government trust heavily impacted. Evidence from across the sector indicates a severe funding gap, but without open data, meaningful reform remains impossible. True solutions require honesty about the scale of the problem to then work towards a fair and equitable funding model.
The government appears to know how much money is required for social care, and yet they are not making that known.
✨ ✅ ❌?
Leeds put about £42.9 million into adult social care for every 100,000 residents in 2024. The English average was £47.8 million. After taking client fees and other income away, the net spend in Leeds fell to £35.9 million per 100,000 people, again below the national figure of £40.5 million.
Leeds is a large, compact city. With more than 829,000 residents packed into 1,472 people per square kilometre, services can be delivered over shorter travel distances. This can cut unit costs, so a pound may stretch further than in rural or scattered areas. Lower spend per head does not always point to lower total resource; it can reflect the economies that come when many users live close together and share the same workforce, buildings and transport routes.
The city is also more deprived than the English norm (average deprivation decile 4.8 against 5.9). Deprivation often pushes demand up, yet Leeds still spends less per person. Part of the gap may be filled by greater reliance on client contributions. Service users in Leeds pay £7.0 million per 100,000 population, only slightly under the national rate. In other words, people themselves cover a similar share of costs even though public spending is lower.
NHS money for social care in Leeds is strikingly small: £4.6 million per 100,000 people, barely three-fifths of the English average of £7.9 million. Integrated Care Boards often pass funds to councils to support hospital discharge and reablement. The figures suggest that such transfers are lower in Leeds, or that they sit in a different budget line. Less NHS input may leave the council carrying a bigger load or may mean that some joint services, for example intermediate care beds, are less extensive.
If unit costs really are lower, citizens may still receive the help they need. However, Leeds shows marked inequality: the spread of deprivation scores is wider than the national pattern. Areas at the sharp end of poverty may carry higher risk of care needs. If the overall pot is lean, those communities could face tighter eligibility, longer waits or reduced hours of home support.
Population has risen by around 25,000 in four years and continues to grow. Unless spending keeps pace, net spend per head could fall further. A bigger, older or poorer population would pull on services just as real-terms funding is already lower than average.
Two levers stand out. First, securing a fairer share of NHS contributions could ease pressure and improve hospital flow. Second, directing more of the existing budget towards the most deprived neighbourhoods may prevent crises and costly residential admissions. Without such steps, the current lower spend per person risks turning economies of scale into shortfalls in care.
✨ ✅ ❌