medium severityCategory mapping gapRef: sig_e600eb3ca50088
Limited evidence: expenditure not mapped to a category
Generated analysis. Final responsibility remains with the authorised council reviewer — verify every evidence source before confirming. This signal describes a difference requiring explanation; it is not a finding of wrongdoing.
What was detected
28% of payments (234,043 records) could not be mapped to a standard work category from the published description. Category totals understate actual spend by an unknown amount.
- Confidence
- 95%
- Evidence completeness
- 100%
- Amount in scope
- —
- Detected
- 2d ago
Alternative explanations
Shown before any conclusion is drawn. In published council spend, these are usually the correct explanation.
- The council publishes a terse or generic expenditure description that carries no work detail.
- The spend genuinely falls outside housing repair and retrofit.
Missing information
What would be needed to resolve this properly, and is not in the public record.
- A richer expenditure narrative or cost-centre description from the publishing council.
Comparison method
Rules-engine classification with abstention.
Source records
Data quality report
analytics
GB-LAS-LDS
Decision history
No decision has been recorded. This signal is in state New.
Provenance
- Ruleset
- UK-LOCAL-GOV-V1
- Model
- civ-sent-2026.1
- Dataset
- 20260720T153938Z
- Pipeline
- civicspend-pipeline-0.1.0
- Authority
- Leeds