Lancashire County Council was accused of making up its mind to close 10 elderly care homes before a public consultation has taken place, but the Council insists they have only started a consultation period and nothing has been decided yet.
Lancashire County Council has an overall majority of Reform UK Ltd councillors, and has called in their DOGE-style cost cutting unit to review Lancashire County Councils finances in June.
Ten care facilities for the elderly are being threatened with closure
The authority’s cabinet voted at a meeting on Thursday to consider the “reprovision” of the services offered by five of its residential homes and five day centres – with the buildings they operate from deemed to be in “significantly poor condition”.
The closures of some or all of the sites – one of which is understood to be home to a 106-year-old woman – could be on the cards next year, once an eight-week consultation has been carried out.
The care homes – Favordale (Colne), Grove House (Adlington), Milbanke (Kirkham), Thornton House (Thornton Cleveleys) and Woodlands (Clayton-le-Moors) – have a combined capacity to accommodate 229 people, roughly 45 at each location.
Meanwhile, the day centres – Byron View (Colne, attached to Favordale), Derby Centre (Ormskirk), Milbanke Day Centre (Kirkham, attached to Milbanke care home), Teal Close, (Thornton Cleveleys, attached to Thornton House) and Vale View (Lancaster) – provide support to older people during daytime hours, including those in the early stages of dementia.
Any closures will see those individuals affected given “choices about moving provision to improve their experience”, a report to be put before Thursday’s meeting says. The changes would be phased in between April and November 2026.
Some councillors are supporting their local facilities
However, some county councillors have already spoken out in defence of the facilities in their areas which could now be under threat.
County Cllr Kim Snape, who represents the Chorley Rural East division, said of Grove House in Adlington that it is “incredibly well-regarded in our local community”.
She told the LDRS:
Lots of staff live locally and many people in Adlington have a connection to the place via family members having lived there. In my view, we need to make every effort to ensure its future.
Pendle Rural division representative David Whipp said of Favordale in Colne that residents were looked after in”a friendly and welcoming environment which is second to none”.
County Cllr Whipp said.
The standard of care is excellent and there’s a very supportive friends group which helps enhance the facilities and activities.
This is extremely worrying for the residents and their families [and] the county council should give an unequivocal commitment to keeping these care homes and day centres operating.
Meanwhile, Skerton county councillor Martyn Sutton said on social media that he will be holding surgeries on-site at Vale View Day Centre in Lancaster “to engage with anyone involved” – pledging also to be “available throughout the process”.
In a statement ahead of the cabinet meeting, Helen Coombes, executive director of adult services at Lancashire County Council, said the authority is
…committed to providing excellent care to the residents of Lancashire.
We understand that change can be difficult, but if the review goes ahead, every step will be handled with compassion, respect, and support for residents and their families.
We want to consider changes to how care is provided to ensure we’re providing the best possible outcomes for our residents.
We also understand that this will be an unsettling time for some of our staff. We deeply value the dedication and compassion they bring to their work – and we will be committed to supporting them through this process.
After this consultation there will be a broader review of adult services
The 10 services whose futures are set to be put under immediate consideration will form the first phase of a broader review of all services for older and disabled people provided by Lancashire County Council, which will take place over the next 18 months.
The authority runs a total of 16 residential care homes and 13 older persons’ day services, along with a raft of disability services – including ‘enablement’ and employment support teams, supported living services and short break provision.
Cabinet will be asked to approve the start of that wider assessment of all in-house care and support, which the county council says is necessary in order to facilitate the wishes of residents who want to remain at home and retain their independence for as long as possible – and to support an NHS push for more community-based care.
It also comes against the backdrop of the county council’s attempt to save £50m in adult social care costs over the next two years.
Residents started petitions to save their local facilities
The consultation has prompted petitions to ‘save’ at least three of the facilities – and claims from some opposition councillors that the fate of the services has already been determined.
Against that backdrop, cabinet member for adult social care Graham Dalton condemned what he claimed was people being “stirred up” by politicians and having their emotions “brought to a fever pitch”.
He said one councillor had received a menacing voicemail which had “threatened him with violence” over the future of the Favordale home, based on “facts that aren’t true”.
When an observer in the audience apparently muttered “liar”, County Cllr Dalton said: “Lies come from…being told something is going to happen before a decision has been made… before the officers who are qualified, professional [and] capable…of looking at a…care home [or] looking at a day centre and saying, ‘This is good enough’ or ‘This isn’t good enough’, ‘This needs to change’ or ‘This needs fixing’ [have done so].”
Opposition party councillors said a timetable has already been made
However, Azhar Ali – leader of the Progressive Lancashire opposition alliance of independent and Green Party county councillors – said the authority had signalled its intentions for the services by drawing up a “timetable” for what would happen if they were to shut.
Referencing a business case for the review that has now been launched, County Cllr Ali noted that a window to “facilitate” the movement of residents to new homes was set to open on 9th February, 2026, and run through until next November.
He said:
That’s a few months away. So there is a timetable for the whole process, but we’re being told – like we’re some sort of lemons – that there is no programme for closure.
But if there’s no programme for closure, you don’t put a timetable in which sets out potential closure of these places – so that does not give confidence to the residents…and their families [as to] what might or might not happen.
County Cllr Ali also claimed that the process was being conducted “the wrong way round”.
The review should have been assessed before a decision was to be taken
He said that the review should have been assessed by the relevant county council scrutiny committee first, with that cross-party group being provided with all of the relevant information – including what it would cost to bring the buildings up to standard or even replace them.
The cabinet would then be able to make an “informed” decision based on the scrutiny feedback, he explained – adding that the stakes for those directly affected were high.
County Cllr Ali said:
For some [residents] who may have dementia or severe disabilities or ill health…that shift…to [living] somewhere else could cost them their lives – that change is not something we should [under]estimate.
However, County Cllr Dalton said he would “flip” that proposition and ask:
What happens if somebody dies because they’re wound up by all this scaremongering and something [then] doesn’t happen to that home?
Does that lie on the councillors that have gone out and told people their jobs are going, their homes are closing, [that] they’re going to be kicked out?
Nothing to scrutinise?
He also rejected the suggestion that there had been any “pre-judgement” of what should happen to the facilities – and rubbished the idea that the matter should have first gone before a scrutiny committee, because “there’s nothing to scrutinise”.
County Cllr Dalton said:
We do the review, then they know what we’re looking at [and] then we know what has to change.
County council leader Stephen Atkinson said the scrutiny system could “feed into the decision” even after the consultation had begun – meaning that there was no need to delay the process.
Deputy Progressive Lancashire group leader Gina Dowding said while she was “appalled” to hear of threats being made against any councillor, there was now “a lack of trust” with service users and residents because of what had been put in the public domain before the consultation had even begun.
It certainly does look as though the outcome of any review has already been decided.
You can say now until you’re blue in the face that’s not the case – [but] the evidence that we have in front of us makes it look that way.
‘Committed to engaging with residents, staff and community’
County Cllr Dalton said the authority was
…committed to engaging with our residents, staff and the community to ensure that their voices are heard and that we make informed decisions that truly reflects their needs.
We must ensure that these services are high quality and safe, they are aligned with our strategic priorities, that they are supported by a sustainable workforce and a market that is sustainable – and that they deliver value for public money.
We are managing any risks to [the] safety and wellbeing of residents, but we cannot afford to wait [while] these facilities continue to deteriorate.
‘Save Our Homes’
The cabinet meeting at which the consultation was given the green light heard comments that County Cllr Ali said had already been sent to him by families and staff that could be affected by any changes to the services under review.
One said:
My Mum, 88, and dad, 86, are both residents – I can’t even bear to think of the stress of moving them.
An apparent staff member at one of the affected homes said:
We are all a family – our oldest resident is 106 years old. Can you imagine what it would do to all these people if they will have to be moved to another home? Some would not make it and [would] pass away.
In relation to Woodlands in Clayton-le-Moors, a family member said:
My auntie is happy there – it would be awful if it closed. She found friendships and… it’s not just a home, it’s somewhere [people] feel safe and cared for.
The county council was also praised as being “best placed to provide older people’s dementia care”, with one person commenting:
I’m yet to see a provider that offers the same standard and person-centred experience.
Cornerstones of the village
Of the five homes that could be closed following the review, two – Favordale and Woodlands – are currently rated as ‘good’ by the CQC, while Grove House, Milbanke and Thornton House all have an overall rating of ‘requires improvement’.
Meanwhile, at least three of the care homes are now the subject of petitions from opposition councillors calling for them to be protected.
Chorley Rural East division’s Labour representative Kim Snape has garnered almost 1,700 signatures in support of Grove House in Adlington, stating that “outraged residents are rallying to save…a cornerstone of our village”.
Favordale in Colne has been backed by more than 2,000 signatories to a petition set up by Pendle Rural division county councillor – and Pendle Borough Council leader and Liberal Democrat – David Whipp. He says residents there are offered a “caring and loving home”.
Hyndburn Council’s deputy Labour leader Kimberley Whitehead has also created a petition supporting Woodlands in Clayton-le-Moors.
Elsewhere, Fylde Conservative MP Andrew Snowden said of the question mark placed over the Milbanke care home in Kirkham that language like “accelerated reprovision” – being used in relation to the service – ”only spreads fear”.
He added:
Everyone knows the care at Milbanke is excellent. Staff, residents and families deserve respect, not uncertainty. [The county council] need to stop playing with words and give a clear promise. Milbanke must stay open.
What is happening – and why?
The first five care homes and five day centres to come under the microscope have been selected for “accelerated” consideration because they are “among the oldest in the [council’s] estate, with outdated designs that fail to meet modern care standards”, according to a cabinet report.
They would require “substantial” investment to address “critical safety and operational issues” and – along with two of the day centres operating from the same sites as the residential homes – expose the county council to “increasing regulatory and reputational risks” when assessed against new Care Quality Commission (CQC) standards.
Meanwhile, the day centres are said to be “significantly underutilised, reflecting a clear shift in demand for their services”.
The authority runs a total of 16 residential care homes and 13 older persons’ day services, with a raft of disability services – including ‘enablement’ and employment support teams, supported living services and short break provision.
The wider assessment of all in-house care and support is necessary, the county council says, in order to facilitate the wishes of residents who want to remain at home and retain their independence for as long as possible – and to support an NHS push for more community-based care.
If it benefits the people, we will do it
County Cllr Dalton claimed the Reform UK administration elected in May to run the county council was facing difficult decisions – and remedying a “requires improvement” rating for adult social care after a CQC inspection from before the party took charge – because the previous ruling Tory group “didn’t dare to lift the lid on adult social care”.
He branded that “poor political leadership”, adding: “We promised…that we would do things differently and this is that promise in action. We said right at the very beginning, if it benefits the people of Lancashire, we would do it; if it doesn’t, …we won’t do it or we will stop it.
County Cllr Dalton said:
We don’t want to leave one stone unturned [and] we will review, we will change and we will improve
The previous County Council supported and invested in new schemes
However, Conservative former cabinet member Aidy Riggott – now leader of the Tory group on the authority – rejected the characterisation of his party’s past “lack of action” on the issue of adult social care.
Speaking to the LDRS, he said:
Can I suggest [County Cllr Dalton] pays a visit to the fantastic Bowgreave Rise [purpose-built development in Garstang] to see not only the vision but the delivery the previous Conservative administration offered to Lancashire – or that he takes a trip to one of the many superb supported living schemes the county council has supported and invested in over the last few years. Or perhaps he could look at the technological improvements brought by the revision to the Telecare service.
He might then find residents more supportive of Reform UKs plans if he offered a vision for the future in Lancashire that included new state-of-the-art facilities and improved technological advances like those the Conservatives delivered, instead of what just looks like a county-wide program of care home and day centre closures, many of which appear to be generating significant objection,
Residents should be supported in their communities, not in homes
The review of directly-provided county council care services sits alongside ongoing work by the authority and the NHS Lancashire and South Cumbria Integrated Care Board (ICB) to create neighbourhood-level teams designed to integrate primary health and social care professionals with members of the community and voluntary sectors.
The aim is to promote “prevention” of ill health and deliver a “person-centred” approach to care, with better co-ordination at the local community level, according to the business case document presented to cabinet.
It adds that the strategy addresses “key feedback” from last year’s CQC assessment which set out “the need to move away from residential and nursing care – both short and long-term – as it leads to residents being supported away from their communities”.
After two articles by Local Democracy reporter Paul Faulkner.
