Key points
- Salford City Council’s adult social care service has been rated “inadequate” by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) following an inspection in November 2025 and a follow‑up report published in May 2026.
- Inspectors found delays in assessments, poor information‑sharing, and difficulties for non‑English speakers trying to access support.
- The council has been told it must make swift and extensive improvements due to weaknesses in oversight after responsibilities were shifted to the local NHS trust.
- Mayor Andy Burnham has acknowledged the failings and said Greater Manchester’s mayoral authority will coordinate a city‑wide plan to fix adult social care.
- The CQC has classified the council’s performance as requiring “rapid improvement” rather than “requires improvement” or “adequate”.
Manchester(Manchester Mirror)May 19, 2026 – Salford City Council’s adult social care service has been rated “inadequate” by the Care Quality Commission (CQC), following a major inspection that exposed delays, poor coordination and communication gaps affecting older and disabled residents.
The regulator examined the way Salford organises and commissions adult social care, including how it works with the NHS, home‑care providers and community organisations to meet people’s needs. As reported by BBC News, the CQC found that the council’s systems for overseeing adult social care were significantly weakened after responsibility for some functions was handed over to the local NHS trust, leading to disorganisation and frustration for users.
Inspectors said people seeking assessments for financial eligibility, care needs or occupational therapy often faced lengthy delays, with some waiting weeks or longer to see frontline staff. As the BBC’s report details, many individuals also struggled to receive clear, up‑to‑date information about their options, and some had to repeat their situation multiple times to different workers.
A particular concern highlighted by the CQC was the impact on non‑English speakers and vulnerable groups, who faced additional barriers when trying to arrange support or understand how services worked. The report also pointed to a lack of a clear, standard hospital‑discharge process, which meant that some adults were left waiting unnecessarily in hospital while arrangements were being sorted out.
Staff providing support to unpaid carers were also found to give inconsistent advice on entitlements to financial assistance, leaving families uncertain about what help they could expect. Overall, the CQC judged that the council’s adult social care provision requires rapid improvement, placing it in the lowest band of its rating scale.
How the CQC reached the “inadequate” rating
The CQC’s judgement is based on a detailed inspection carried out in November 2025, with the main findings published in an online report on 14 May 2026. Inspectors reviewed case files, governance records and quality‑assurance documents, and spoke with managers, frontline staff, service users and their families.
The regulator focuses on five key domains: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well‑led. In Salford, the “well‑led” and “responsive” domains were specifically flagged as weak, reflecting problems with management oversight, accountability and the ability to respond quickly to people’s changing needs.
The report notes that when some adult social care responsibilities were transferred to the local NHS partner, the council did not put in place sufficient checks and balances to ensure standards were maintained. This led to a loss of control over how assessments were timed, which providers were used, and how feedback from users was recorded and acted upon.
As the CQC’s summary explains, inspectors also observed that information about available services was not always shared consistently across teams, meaning that two people in similar situations might receive very different advice. Viewed together, these failings contributed to the “inadequate” rating for the council’s adult social care arrangements.
What the council and mayorship say
Salford City Council has publicly accepted the CQC’s findings and committed to implementing a turnaround plan. In a statement issued shortly after the report’s publication, the council said it had already begun actions such as: improving internal processes for assessments, strengthening links with the NHS for hospital discharge, and enhancing support for unpaid carers.
As reported by the BBC, council leaders acknowledged that the organisational changes involving the NHS trust had, in practice, diluted their control over how services were delivered on the ground. They admitted that in some cases, people were not being told clearly how long they would wait for an assessment or what type of support they could expect.
Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham has also responded, telling the BBC that the failings in Salford formed part of a wider pattern affecting adult social care across the region. He said the mayoral authority would draw up a city‑wide improvement programme, working with councils, providers and the NHS to standardise assessment times, information‑sharing and discharge planning.
Burnham did not blame any single institution but stressed that the scale of the pressures in adult social care – including staff shortages and rising demand from an ageing population – required co‑ordinated action rather than isolated fixes.
What this means for residents and families
For older adults, disabled residents and their carers in Salford, the “inadequate” rating translates into a system that may be slower, less predictable and more confusing to navigate than necessary. People referred for an assessment can expect to encounter longer waiting times than would be typical in better‑rated authorities, unless those waits are reduced by the council’s planned changes.
The CQC report also suggests that those who speak languages other than English or who have cognitive impairments may find it harder to understand their options and assert their rights to care unless communication and translation support are improved. Unpaid carers, meanwhile, may continue to receive inconsistent information about financial help, such as the possibility of direct payments or carer‑support allowances, until the council standardises guidance and training for staff.
The regulator has made it clear that it will monitor progress closely, with further inspections scheduled if the council’s action plan does not produce visible improvements within a set timeframe. Until then, users are advised to keep records of conversations, ask for written confirmation of decisions, and contact advocacy organisations if they feel their needs are not being met.
Background of the particular development
Adult social care in England is a statutory responsibility of local councils, but much of the frontline delivery is carried out by independent providers under contract. In Greater Manchester, including Salford, recent years have seen a push to integrate council services more tightly with the NHS, motivated by the belief that joint working can reduce delays and hospital admissions.
Salford City Council span of adult social care spend in 2024/25 was notable enough for the CQC to document it as part of its financial and governance review, underlining that the service is a major component of the council’s budget. However, the shift of some functions to the local NHS trust appears to have created a governance gap, in which the council’s usual oversight mechanisms did not fully adapt.
This is not the first time social care in the region has drawn negative scrutiny. Previous CQC reports across Greater Manchester have highlighted similar themes: staff shortages, fragmented information systems and variable guidance to carers. The Salford inspection is therefore part of a broader trend of regulatory concern about how councils and NHS bodies coordinate adult social care in a context of constrained funding and rising demand.
Prediction: How this can affect Salford residents and policymakers
For Salford residents reliant on or planning to use adult social care, the immediate risk is that assessments and support may continue to be delayed or inconsistent until the council’s improvement plan takes full effect. That can mean longer stays in hospital, greater strain on unpaid carers, and a higher chance that people’s conditions worsen because support arrives too late.
Over the medium term, the “inadequate” rating is likely to prompt tighter scrutiny from both the CQC and the Department of Health and Social Care, which could influence how much discretion the council has in future budget decisions. Local councillors and the mayoral authority may also face pressure from community groups and advocacy organisations to publish regular progress updates and co‑design changes with service users.
For other Greater Manchester local authorities, the Salford case may serve as a warning about the risks of shifting responsibilities between councils and the NHS without robust governance frameworks. Authorities may be more cautious about similar reorganisations and instead focus on strengthening existing joint‑working arrangements, information‑sharing systems and staff training.
For national policymakers, the Salford findings add to the evidence that adult social care in England remains under‑funded and overly fragmented, even where local efforts at integration exist. This could feed into future debates about a more centralised funding model, clearer national standards for assessment times, and stronger rights for unpaid carers seeking financial and practical support.
