Care villas close, onward placements remain uncertain
Public documents show that no clearly suitable care was available for some of Villa ExpertCare’s children.
The closure of specialised care villas for seriously ill children and children with multiple disabilities continues to cause uncertainty. In Rijswijk, 25 children are affected, while court documents point to a shortage of suitable alternatives.
Villa ExpertCare operated four locations for children requiring intensive nursing care. During 2026, plans were made to transfer the care activities or close locations. The organisation had previously pointed to insufficient cost coverage and staffing problems. The minister countered that continuity of care for every child had to remain guaranteed.
Public documents from the Court of Appeal state that the clients’ council warned as early as February that there were insufficient suitable alternatives. The council referred to discussions with parents, staff, the sector organisation Binkz, Stichting Kind & Zorg and doctors from UMCG. According to those involved, there was no nationwide provision of nursing care homes for children and children’s day-care centres.
According to local reporting, the Rijswijk location provided care for 25 children. That number does not mean that all these children will be left without care: some may be able to receive home care, day care or care at another institution. The issue is that suitable care means more than just a bed or a nursing service; it also means continuity, accessibility, medical expertise and an arrangement that fits the family.
The minister previously promised that locations would not close until a suitable provision had been found for all children. At the same time, parliamentary papers acknowledged that emergency solutions can sometimes mean additional travel time, home care or a different distribution of care. Parents and the clients’ council fear that such solutions are available on paper but insufficient in practice.
The NZa is conducting research into the rates for day care and residential care in medical child care. That research may lead to adjustments for later years, but will not automatically resolve the immediate shortage. As long as there is no public individual overview of each child’s onward placement, it remains unclear how many families actually have a sustainable solution and how many still depend on temporary arrangements.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- Villa ExpertCare provides specialised medical care for children.
- According to public documents, there is insufficient nationwide provision of suitable alternatives.
- The government, health insurers and provider are involved in the transfer.
Left
Arguments Specialist care for children is a public responsibility and must not depend on the financial viability of a single private provider. The government must organise capacity, staff and tariffs on a structural basis.
Values Solidarity, public healthcare, accessibility and protection of vulnerable children.
Consequences Greater public coordination and higher tariffs could provide continuity, but would require long-term public funding.
Centre
Arguments The first priority is to ensure that every child receives a safe and suitable placement. Tariffs, oversight and regional capacity should then be evaluated together.
Values Continuity, tailored care, due care and institutional responsibility.
Consequences A phased approach could limit immediate harm, but would leave the structural scarcity in place for the time being.
Right
Arguments Care providers must remain responsible for a proper transfer and must not automatically expect public support when their business model does not work.
Values Responsibility, efficiency, oversight and limited government spending.
Consequences Stricter oversight could address poor management, but without additional capacity families would still have little choice.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The reporting is based on parliamentary papers, a court ruling and public reporting. The text avoids the unsubstantiated claim that all 25 children are without care.
- confirmed The Rijswijk location concerns 25 children. — Mentioned in public reporting by the clients’ council. source
- confirmed The clients’ council warned of insufficient suitable alternatives. — Described in the Court of Appeal’s ruling. source
- confirmed The minister linked closure to finding suitable provisions. — Confirmed in parliamentary papers and NOS reporting. source
Editor's note
The shortage of suitable alternatives and the figure of 25 children in Rijswijk are documented. There is no current public overview of the individual outcomes for each child.Sources
More on this in Dutch media
- De Telegraaf — „expertcare medische kindzorg”
- AD — „expertcare medische kindzorg”
- de Volkskrant — „expertcare medische kindzorg”