01
Local government reorganisation should seek to avoid or minimise disaggregation. This is to mitigate the risks of variation in rate of demand; increased unit costs of commissioned care; and a detrimental impact on service quality – all of which the analysis in this programme has highlighted. In some county areas, this is best achieved by prioritising proposals that avoid disaggregation through county-wide unitary authorities. Where disaggregation is to take place, the analysis suggests that at a minimum the government should ensure that new authorities are above their stated criteria of 500,000 or more. The analysis indicates this will best mitigate the risks of variation in demand, whilst also reducing the anticipated increase in staffing cost and unit cost of care. The government should scrutinise and rigorously evaluate all proposals against their own statutory criteria, with a particular focus on, and due weighting for, the impact on people-based services. The assessment of the impact of disaggregation and the potential ‘fragmentation’ of high-cost services should incorporate a much wider range of factors than the financial impact on the potential savings profile from LGR. These include the potential upward pressure on unit costs due to reductions in purchasing power; workforce deployment and the recruitment and retention of staff; reductions in provider capacity and placement sufficiency; and risks to the continuing quality of services. 02 Given the expected level of competing proposals and range of assumptions underpinning these, particularly in relation to the disaggregation of people-based services, the government should consider appointing an independent body to evaluate proposals to ensure the long-term sustainability of local government in non-metropolitan England. 03
80
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs