People aged 65 or over
17.1%21 March 2021 · Stoke-on-Trent
Show the workings
Published Census 2021 count; percentage uses the matching population denominator
All usual residents
44,264 out of 258,370.
Source and method →Stoke-on-Trent · England
Community life
Stoke-on-Trent council area. Every figure carries its own date.
A place is more than its average house price. The census shows who lives here and some of the pressures households face.
People reporting bad or very bad health
7.4%21 March 2021 · Stoke-on-Trent
Show the workings
Published Census 2021 count; percentage uses the matching population denominator
All usual residents; self-reported, not age-standardised
19,012 out of 258,369.
Source and method →Households facing at least one measured disadvantage
58.9%21 March 2021 · Stoke-on-Trent
The census checks education, employment, health and housing. This is not a measure of income or poverty.
Show the workings
Published Census 2021 count; percentage uses the matching population denominator
All households
65,032 out of 110,400.
Source and method →Households facing two or more measured disadvantages
24%21 March 2021 · Stoke-on-Trent
The census checks education, employment, health and housing. This is not a measure of income or poverty.
Show the workings
Published Census 2021 count; percentage uses the matching population denominator
All households
26,451 out of 110,400.
Source and method →People aged 16+ with no qualifications
25.9%21 March 2021 · Stoke-on-Trent
Show the workings
Published Census 2021 count; percentage uses the matching population denominator
Residents aged 16 and over
53,354 out of 205,898.
Source and method →People aged 16+ with a degree or equivalent
21.8%21 March 2021 · Stoke-on-Trent
Show the workings
Published Census 2021 count; percentage uses the matching population denominator
Residents aged 16 and over
44,948 out of 205,898.
Source and method →Different needs within the area
People reporting bad or very bad health
4% to 10%
People reporting bad or very bad health ranged from 4% in Meir Park to 10% in Abbey Hulton — a gap of 5.9 percentage points.
21 March 2021 · 34 of 34 current wards with comparable figures.
Residents described their own health. Differences in age matter, so this is a prompt to investigate needs, not a score for local health services.
See each ward and the workings
These are separate ward percentages, not an average of them. Boundaries: May 2026. Missing or differently defined figures are excluded from this range and stay visible on the ward pages.
Source and method →
People aged 65 or over
7.6% to 27.6%
People aged 65 or over ranged from 7.6% in Hanley Park, Joiner's Square & Shelton to 27.6% in Bucknall & Eaton Park — a gap of 20 percentage points.
21 March 2021 · 34 of 34 current wards with comparable figures.
Age helps locate demand for accessible homes, transport and support. Being older does not itself mean someone needs care.
See each ward and the workings
These are separate ward percentages, not an average of them. Boundaries: May 2026. Missing or differently defined figures are excluded from this range and stay visible on the ward pages.
Source and method →
People aged 16+ with no qualifications
15.8% to 33.7%
People aged 16+ with no qualifications ranged from 15.8% in Basford & Hartshill to 33.7% in Abbey Hulton — a gap of 18 percentage points.
21 March 2021 · 34 of 34 current wards with comparable figures.
Formal qualifications are only one part of someone's skills. Training decisions also need current vacancies, employment and residents' experience.
See each ward and the workings
These are separate ward percentages, not an average of them. Boundaries: May 2026. Missing or differently defined figures are excluded from this range and stay visible on the ward pages.
Source and method →
Households facing two or more measured disadvantages
12.6% to 35.2%
Households facing two or more measured disadvantages ranged from 12.6% in Meir Park to 35.2% in Abbey Hulton — a gap of 22.6 percentage points.
21 March 2021 · 34 of 34 current wards with comparable figures.
These households met at least two census conditions covering education, employment, health and housing. This is not an income or poverty measure.
See each ward and the workings
These are separate ward percentages, not an average of them. Boundaries: May 2026. Missing or differently defined figures are excluded from this range and stay visible on the ward pages.
Source and method →
Local places and initiatives
Next to Stoke-on-Trent railway station and the Trent and Mersey Canal
Goods Yard neighbourhood
Former railway-side land has become homes, workspace, places to eat and a public square.
Council reports development completed · source does not state a status date
Responsible body: Stoke-on-Trent City Council and Capital&Centric
Latest evidence: The council describes Goods Yard as completed, with 174 rental homes and commercial space. Completion does not establish the number occupied or the net number of jobs created.
Next thing to establish: What dated decision or progress report confirms the current stage?
Progress, funding and source
- Cost
- Not established by the evidence checked.
- Funding
- Not established by the evidence checked.
- Area covered
- No official project-to-ward mapping has been verified; no ward allocation is inferred from a city or street name.
No verified ward footprint is assigned.
Housing, regeneration and operations: recent projects →
Source checked 2026-10-17. A plan or announcement is not proof of completion.
Questions for the next progress report
- What is the approved cost, including ongoing maintenance?
- Which funding is committed, and what remains conditional?
- Which neighbourhoods are covered by an official project plan, and which benefits still need testing?
- What is the next published milestone, and what evidence will show residents benefit?
Make the station arrival connect clearly to Goods Yard and the wider city →
Make room for homes people can afford →
Connect local skills to local opportunities →
Target support where disadvantages overlap →
How to track delivery →Station Road and Winton Square, Stoke-on-Trent
Station Road and Winton Square improvements
Wider pavements, crossings and bus facilities improve the route into the city from the railway station.
Council reports works completed · source does not state a status date
Responsible body: Stoke-on-Trent City Council
Latest evidence: The council records completion, including a bus gate, improved pick-up areas and real-time bus information. Changes in traffic, journey times or collision numbers need separate follow-up evidence.
Next thing to establish: What dated decision or progress report confirms the current stage?
Progress, funding and source
- Cost
- Not established by the evidence checked.
- Funding
- Not established by the evidence checked.
- Area covered
- No official project-to-ward mapping has been verified; no ward allocation is inferred from a city or street name.
No verified ward footprint is assigned.
Transforming Cities Fund: Station Road →
Source checked 2026-10-17. A plan or announcement is not proof of completion.
Questions for the next progress report
- What is the approved cost, including ongoing maintenance?
- Which funding is committed, and what remains conditional?
- Which neighbourhoods are covered by an official project plan, and which benefits still need testing?
- What is the next published milestone, and what evidence will show residents benefit?
Make the station arrival connect clearly to Goods Yard and the wider city →
Target support where disadvantages overlap →
How to track delivery →Westwood Court and Wellington Court, Hanley
Westwood Court and Wellington Court refurbishment
The proposed work combines insulation and weatherproofing with sprinklers and lift improvements in two Hanley tower blocks.
Contract appointment proposed following tender; later approval not verified · evidence dated 2026-03-19
Responsible body: Stoke-on-Trent City Council
Latest evidence: The March announcement sought approval for the £6.6 million refurbishment. It anticipated a June 2027 start and December 2028 completion if approved. Residents were expected to remain during the work; that expectation requires continuing resident support and safety arrangements.
Next thing to establish: Which funding is committed, and what remains conditional?
Progress, funding and source
- Cost
- £6.6 million proposed refurbishment reported in March 2026; approved contract sum and final outturn not verified.
- Funding
- Not established by the evidence checked.
- Area covered
- No verified current ward footprint is assigned. The named location or council-wide remit does not establish benefits in every ward.
No verified ward footprint is assigned.
Westwood Court and Wellington Court refurbishment →
Source checked 2026-10-17. A plan or announcement is not proof of completion.
Questions for the next progress report
- Which neighbourhoods are covered by an official project plan, and which benefits still need testing?
- What is the next published milestone, and what evidence will show residents benefit?
Keep tower-block residents informed and safe during upgrades →
Make room for homes people can afford →
Plan homes and care around an older population →
Bring support closer to people in poor health →
Target safety work where problems repeat →
Target support where disadvantages overlap →
How to track delivery →