Local government reorganisation could hit vulnerable people with “triple whammy” of worse services, higher costs for care, and not enough staff, county councils claim

In the report, published last week (10 October), the network claimed that new unitary councils with populations substantially below 500,000 people would increase the price councils pay for care, putting further financial costs on under-pressure services.

It noted: “Modelling suggests that if all new unitary councils had a population below this figure, this would result in additional unit costs of between £180m and £270m annually solely as a result of reductions in purchasing power. In contrast, if all new unitary councils had a population above 500,000, it would reduce care fees by £65m a year across England.”

Meanwhile, the report warned that splitting county councils into smaller local authorities would require hundreds of new senior roles, while councils “already grapple with a shortfall in care staff”.

CCN said: “Modelling shows that if all new unitary councils had a population of below 500,000, this would result in a requirement of between 500 - 1,100 additional management and senior roles in care services. In contrast, if all new unitary councils had a population of above 500,000, fewer senior managers than are currently in place will be required, saving those areas money to reinvest in care services.”

Last year’s English Devolution White Paper outlined plans for an overhaul of council structures, with government committing to end ‘two-tier’ local government: replacing 185 county and district councils with new unitary authorities in 21 areas.

Official government guidance had set out that new unitary councils should have a population of 500,000 or more and ‘avoid’ the fragmentation of vital care services. However, the guidance outlined that there may be ‘flexibility’ on this number in certain scenarios.

Research carried out as part of the report suggested that larger authorities are more likely to receive ‘Outstanding’ or ‘Good’ ratings from Ofsted for children’s services.

Finally, CCN claimed that splitting county councils into smaller unitaries covering populations as small as 300,000 or lower could see some of the new authorities “overwhelmed with demand”.

The report found that the smaller the council, the more they could experience “extreme concentrations of care users” - effectively meaning that care costs are highly variable between new authorities and may exceed planned budgets.

CCN said: “This could leave some councils exposed to unaffordable costs and the use of expensive out of area placements. This could challenge their financial sustainability from inception.”

Making recommendations for alternative solutions, CCN said that instead of running the risk of worsening services, government should “grasp the nettle and ensure that the reforms are a catalyst to transform the way in which vulnerable people are supported with local authority care”.

However, the network said the research demonstrates this can “only be achieved by ensuring the government stick to their own statutory criteria and rigorously evaluate all proposals against it”.

Cllr Matthew Hicks, Chair of the County Councils Network said: “Local government reorganisation has the potential to deliver significant benefits for local taxpayers and improve every day services residents rely on. However, it also carries with it significant risks if it’s not delivered in the right way.

“[…] With several areas now submitting competing proposals, the study clearly shows the stark choice facing the government. It provides clear evidence that there are very real risks to care services if county councils are split into multiple small unitary councils. Those that depend on care could face worse services, be met with significant upheaval, and have too few staff to adequately deliver their support. At the same time, councils and local taxpayers could be loaded with substantive extra costs.

“Put simply, reorganisation plans could make or break care services unless the government gets these reforms right.”

He added: “It is therefore vital that the government sticks to the criteria it set out earlier this year whereby new councils cover populations of over 500,000 people. Considering these are the most important and expensive local authority services, ministers must ensure they rigorously evaluate all proposals and heavily weight their decisions based on the risks to people-based services.”

Responding to the report, President of the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services (ADASS), Jess McGregor said: “This report reinforces concerns we raised with Ministers in August about the risks local government reorganisation poses to hundreds of thousands of people who are older-aged, disabled or in vulnerable situations that draw on care and support. The findings highlight important issues government must address: developing a pipeline of Directors of Adult Social Services, a plan to address disproportionate impacts of ordinary residence decisions, and ensuring adult social care can contribute to the shift from hospital to community care.

“New councils must be financially sustainable from day one and able to meet their legal duties to provide care and support. It’s vital that Ministers engage adult social care leaders in this process by inviting them to sit on Joint Committees and help assess all proposals. ADASS will continue to work with Ministers and civil servants as so many of the people our members serve rely on us getting this right.” 

A Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government spokesperson said: “We are removing layers of duplication and waste in local authorities by bringing services under one roof, meaning residents will benefit from improved and more preventative public services.

“Local Government Reorganisation is long overdue and will also save taxpayers’ cash by ending the current ‘two-tier’ system that hinders service development, creates fragmented services and blurred lines of accountability across county and district councils for almost 20 million people in England.”

The Government noted that it remains committed to ending two-tier local government in England, and to move to new structures “as soon as practicable”.

Lottie Winson