Council scorecard

Ashford Borough Council

Type
borough
Population
134,000 (ONS mid-year estimate, rounded)
Political control
No overall control — Ashford Independents + Green minority (since May 2023)
Next election
6 May 2027 (whole council, all 47 seats)
Council website
www.ashford.gov.uk

Scorecard

Methodology published 2026-05-18. Pending cells reflect data collection in progress, not methodology uncertainty — they will populate as the underlying data is gathered.

Refuse collection

Missed bin reports, recycling rates, complaint resolution time

68 C

Scored on the two DEFRA-published components — recycling rate and residual household waste, FY 2024-25 final data (England averages: 42.0% / 513.3kg per household) — with the remaining components (missed-bin reports, complaint resolution time, service consistency) pending data ingest. Ashford recycled 48.8% of household waste in 2024-25 — second-best in Kent and well above the England average of 42.0% — with residual waste of 398.6kg per household vs 513.3kg nationally. Attribution: Ashford Independents + Green minority administration (Noel Ovenden), in office since May 2023.

as of 2026-07-02 · source

Complaints handling

Volume, response times, LGSCO upheld findings

52 D

Small-numbers caveat: district-tier LGSCO investigation counts are tiny (0–4 a year) and a single case can swing the uphold percentage from 0% to 100%, so this score rests on process indicators — upheld volume per 100,000 residents vs the 1.0 district average, remedies offered before the Ombudsman, and compliance with recommendations — across 2025-26 and 2024-25, never on the raw uphold percentage alone. 2025-26 figures precede the LGSCO annual letters (due ~July 2026) and may be revised. 2025-26: 3 investigations, all 3 upheld — 2.1 upheld per 100,000 residents, roughly double the 1.0 district average — though a remedy had already been offered before the Ombudsman in 1 of the 3 (33% vs the 15% average), and the council missed the agreed timescale on its single compliance case; 2024-25: no investigations completed. Attribution: Ashford Independents + Green minority administration (Noel Ovenden) throughout both years.

as of 2026-07-02 · source

FOI response

Average response time, refusal/exemption rate, compliance with 20-day statutory deadline

Pending

Score pending — Ashford publishes no FOI performance statistics (checked 2026-07-03; the information-rights pages carry request and internal-review procedures only), so no component of this metric can be scored from public data. What is known: 0 ICO decision notices in the three years to July 2026, and ~961 requests via WhatDoTheyKnow (Oct 2025 snapshot). A standardised information request for the missing statistics is planned for the next refresh.

as of 2026-07-03

Financial health & budget discipline

Revenue budget variance, capital programme delivery, reserves + Section 114 risk, external auditor VfM judgment, council tax positioning + trajectory vs national

65 C

Weighted across the six published components: revenue budget variance 25%, capital programme delivery 20%, reserves & Section 114 risk 20%, external auditor VfM judgement 15%, council tax positioning 10%, council tax trajectory 10%. 2025/26 outturn: £183k (0.8%) deficit on a £22.1m net budget, funded from the MTFP Risk reserve; usable General Fund reserves £40.3m (up £7.1m in year) with the unearmarked reserve on-policy at 15% of net budget; auditor: one key recommendation, on Housing Revenue Account medium-term sustainability (fully costed 30-year business plan, stock-condition data), with disclaimed opinions up to 2023-24 under the national audit backstop — the HRA (2024 self-referral to the Regulator of Social Housing) and Stodmarsh nutrient neutrality are the structural pressures. The capital-delivery variance is not stated in the outturn report, so that component is excluded and the rest re-weighted. Council tax: Band D £199.37, 2nd-lowest of the 12 Kent districts; 5-yr CAGR 2.94% vs 2.64% nationally. Attribution: Ashford Independents + Green minority administration (Noel Ovenden), in office since May 2023.

as of 2026-07-03 · source

Transparency

Open data publication, councillor expenses, contract register, committee paper publication

71 B

Fixed-date website audit (2026-07-03) against the Transparency Code checklist: spending-data currency and format, contracts register, councillor allowances, interests, committee papers, senior pay, open data, FOI disclosure log. Items not individually verified this quarter are scored neutrally and flagged. A tidy transparency hub with a genuine open-data section, published FOI requests, councillor allowances, senior-pay and leadership pages, and land/TU-facility-time Code items. Weaknesses: spending is published quarterly rather than monthly (current to the January–March 2026 quarter, £250 threshold) and no contracts register was located. Attribution: audit conducted under the Ashford Independents + Green minority administration (Noel Ovenden).

as of 2026-07-03 · source

Planning

Application approval ratios, appeal-overturn rate, determination time vs statutory targets

69 C

Scored against the England averages (majors in time 91.0%, non-majors 90.8%, major appeal overturns 3.1%) over the 24 months to March 2026 (speed) and June 2025 (appeal quality), from MHCLG designation-regime tables; the enforcement-trend component (15%) is pending and the three measured components are re-weighted pro rata. The national "in time" measure includes agreed extensions of time. 100% of major applications (59 decisions) and 94.8% of non-majors decided in time — both above the England averages — but 6.1% of major decisions were overturned at appeal, nearly double the 3.1% England average (small denominators are volatile; designation threshold 10%). Attribution: Ashford Independents + Green minority administration (Noel Ovenden) throughout the April 2024 – March 2026 window.

as of 2026-07-02 · source

Education & children's services

SEND/EHCP statutory processing, SEND tribunal LA-loss rate, children's services Ofsted rating, school transport delivery (county + unitary only)

N/A

Education and children's services are not a district/borough function. The county council (or, for Medway, the unitary authority) holds this remit.

Safeguarding & LADO

LADO referral handling, multi-agency safeguarding (MASH) timeliness, Section 47 enquiry compliance, independent safeguarding audit findings (county + unitary only)

N/A

Safeguarding is the statutory function of the county council or unitary authority via the LADO (Local Authority Designated Officer) and multi-agency safeguarding hub.

Manifesto delivery (Trust)

KLN tracks what the controlling party promised at the most recent election vs what was actually delivered. KEPT/PARTIAL/BROKEN/PENDING/OUT_OF_SCOPE categorisation.

75 B

Trust score: 3 judged pledges + 3 categorised public issues, averaged.

as of 2026-09-29

Top public issues for Ashford residents

This is editorial assessment, not a metric score. Each issue carries an alignment tag — ALIGNED (council in step with residents), MIXED (some action falls short), COUNTERACTING (council against residents on this), or SILENT (no clear position). KLN-curated. Council positions added verbatim where provided. Right-of-reply opens with initial publication.

  1. 🟢Aligned

    Climate action + carbon neutrality

    Residents increasingly demand visible climate action; Ashford's carbon footprint relative to comparable boroughs is a tracked concern.

    Council position

    Coalition adopted Draft Carbon Neutral Action Plan; council's own operations carbon-neutral target 2030, Ashford-wide before 2050.

    KLN assessment

    Aligned. Plan adopted is concrete first step. Delivery against milestones is the test over the term.

  2. 🟡Mixed

    Rural development + greenbelt protection

    Ashford's rural communities face pressure from edge-of-town development + speculative housing applications.

    Council position

    Independents/Green coalition broadly supportive of rural-character protection in planning decisions.

    KLN assessment

    Statements supportive; planning decision outcomes + Planning Inspectorate appeal results are the action evidence and not yet reviewed. Per the "actions, not statements" principle: MIXED.

  3. 🟡Mixed

    Town centre vitality + Ashford station regeneration

    Ashford town centre faces footfall + retail pressure; the Ashford International station's reduced services since 2021 has compounded economic concerns.

    Council position

    KCC at county level has pledged to lobby for Ebbsfleet + Ashford International reuse. ABC's direct role is town-centre planning + business support.

    KLN assessment

    Mixed: ABC engagement is real but the international-station question is largely outside borough control.

News from this council's area

How this scorecard works

Each metric is scored 0-100 and banded A through F. We do NOT aggregate to a single overall ranking — combining unrelated performance areas would mislead. See the methodology page for full details, thresholds, and data sources.

Spot an error or have data we should add for Ashford? editor@kentlocalnews.co.uk.