LGA issues briefing on local government reorganisation and lessons for adult social care

Local government in England is currently going through a process which will result in the largest reorganisation since 1974.

The briefing, published last week (8 May), summarises the lessons learnt from areas and councils that have gone through similar reorganisation in the recent past.

The LGA said: “The scope covers the documented experience of those areas and the unitary councils that emerged. It is important to note that the purpose of this report is to draw our lessons that will be applicable to those currently going through reorganisation rather than specific issues to local areas. The intention of this report is to be a resource for the future rather than historical analysis of past events.

“Whilst we are focussing on Adult Social Care (ASC) risks and issues there are inevitably general corporate wide issues that we are cognoscente of their impact on these services.”

The briefing outlined the following key takeaway lessons:

• Senior ASC leaders must shape operating models, safeguarding structures and partnership arrangements from the outset.
• A shared understanding of “safe and legal on day 1” avoids drift and protects statutory duties.
• Dedicated Project Management Office (PMO) capacity, early mobilisation, transparent reporting, and managed dependencies are essential.
• Referral pathways, thresholds, governance arrangements and case documentation must remain intact throughout transition.
• Clear communication, continuity of payments and early contract mapping preserve fragile care markets.
• Early communication, involvement in design, and proactive morale and wellbeing support mitigate anxiety and turnover.
• Data migration, system integration and information governance are among the highest‑risk areas and require early investment.
• Robust and effective use of data to manage performance and finance.

The briefing observed that there is no consistent relationship between the size of a council and the quality or productivity of its adult social care services.

It said: “While larger scale can help absorb fixed costs, it can also lead to bureaucracy and disconnected leadership; conversely, smaller footprints often have a 'superpower' in their ability to build trust and respond to local contexts.”

Looking at leadership, the briefing noted that a primary lesson across local government reorganisation (LGR) reports and publications is the necessity of appointing "shadow" directors and chief officers as early as possible.

It said: “These leaders are essential for stabilising key relationships, shaping transition plans, and providing the visible commitment needed to build workforce confidence before the new organization officially goes live. […] Where senior officers are not appointed early enough, councils struggle to make timely decisions about service design, workforce structures, and financial planning.”

Meanwhile, the briefing highlighted the importance of protecting the adult social care provider market during reorganisation.

It warned: “One of the biggest risks is the potential for 'provider shock', where changes in fee structures, workforce churn, or simple uncertainty prompt care providers to withdraw from an area or reduce their capacity.

“In the absence of strong, early leadership, reorganisation can unintentionally distort local care markets, particularly where shared contracts lack clear inter‑authority agreements, leading to disputes, inconsistencies, and confusion for providers operating across boundaries.”

Looking at safeguarding and statutory duties, the briefing observed that maintaining statutory compliance under the Care Act 2014 is a primary requirement for any "safe and legal" day 1 transition.

It said: “Councils must ensure that high-risk functions, such as adult safeguarding (Section 42 enquiries) and mental health crisis response, have clearly assigned staff and up-to-date procedures from the moment the new authority becomes operational.

“Because reorganisation can strain expertise and capacity, some councils choose to maintain joint safeguarding arrangements during the initial year. In Cumbria, for instance, all partners advocated for keeping a single joint Safeguarding Adults Board across the two new unitaries to ensure continuity and pooled expertise during a fragile transition period.”

Lottie Winson