Councils warn of social care ‘triple whammy’ from government reorganisation plans

Ministers are being urged to stick to population thresholds for new unitary councils after new research warns that splitting up county councils could leave millions of people facing worse care, higher costs and critical staffing shortages.

The research, carried out by Newton and commissioned by CCN, warns that proposals to break up existing county councils risk delivering a “triple whammy” for local care systems — unless ministers adhere to the government’s original criteria for reorganisation, which recommended new councils should cover populations of at least 500,000.

The warning comes as several areas across England submit competing proposals to become new unitary authorities, following last year’s English Devolution White Paper. The government’s plan aims to replace the current two-tier structure — in which county and district councils share responsibilities — with single-tier unitary councils in 21 areas.

CCN argues that how these reforms are implemented will “make or break” local care services. But a survey included in the report suggests deep concern among senior care professionals about the process: fewer than one in ten (6%) of county council chief executives and directors of adult and children’s services believe ministers will fully consider the risks to care before making their decisions.

The Newton study concludes that the government’s forthcoming decisions “will have profound, long-lasting impacts on the most vulnerable members of society.” It finds that councils serving smaller populations — around 300,000 or fewer — could struggle to deliver sustainable, high-quality care, while larger-scale councils are more likely to protect service quality, retain staff and manage costs effectively.

The analysis highlights three key risks if counties are split into multiple small unitaries. Firstly, smaller councils could lose economies of scale, pushing up care costs and creating additional financial pressure on already stretched budgets. Newton’s modelling suggests that if all new unitary councils were below 500,000 in population, it could increase annual care costs by up to £270 million.

Secondly, the report warns that breaking up county councils could worsen staffing shortages. Creating smaller councils would require hundreds of new senior roles in adult and children’s services — potentially between 500 and 1,100 additional positions nationwide — at a time when the care workforce is already struggling to recruit and retain staff.

Finally, the study finds that smaller authorities tend to have greater variation in demand and higher concentrations of people with complex needs. This could leave new councils financially exposed from the outset, especially where demand for care exceeds projections.

The report also notes that larger authorities are more likely to be rated “Good” or “Outstanding” by Ofsted for children’s services. Currently, 16 of the 21 county councils fall into those categories, suggesting that breaking them up could risk destabilising high-performing systems.

Cllr Matthew Hicks, chair of the County Councils Network, said the findings should “focus minds on the impact these proposals will have on the lives of the most vulnerable people who depend on local authority care and support day in, day out.”

“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. This report should focus minds on the impact that these proposals will have on the lives of the most vulnerable people who depend on local authority care and support day in, day out.

“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.”

He added that it was “vital” the government sticks to its stated criteria for new councils of over 500,000 people, and that ministers “rigorously evaluate all proposals” based on their impact on social care and other people-based services.

Jess McGregor, president of the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services (ADASS), echoed those concerns, saying the report “reinforces” warnings previously raised with ministers.

“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.”

The CCN is calling on ministers to ensure the risks identified in the report are fully weighed when deciding between competing proposals and to consider appointing an independent body to evaluate the long-term impact on care.

With reorganisation decisions expected in the coming months, sector leaders warn that the stakes could not be higher. For the millions of people who rely on council-delivered care and support, they say, the outcome of these reforms could determine whether services improve — or unravel.