Digital skills roundtable for adult social care leaders and managers

Digital Imperative in Crisis

Adult social care in England supports over 800,000 people, mostly older adults or those with disabilities, through a workforce of roughly 1.6 million. The sector has long grappled with underfunding, high staff turnover, and rising demand driven by demographic shifts and post-pandemic effects. Local authorities spent £29.4 billion on it in 2024-25, a 9% increase year-on-year, yet 81% of councils anticipate overspending budgets, with a collective £564 million shortfall projected.

Digital technology promises relief: electronic records, remote monitoring, and data sharing could reduce administrative burdens, enable earlier interventions, and support independent living—potentially delaying costly residential placements. Government strategy, including the 10 Year Health Plan and Data (Use and Access) Act 2025, positions digital as core infrastructure, not optional add-on. Every provider is expected to adopt assured digital social care records and meet security standards before the Parliament ends, likely mid-2029.

Recent moves underscore urgency. In 2025, £12 million was allocated for digital training, focused on leaders via qualifications like the Level 5 Digital Leadership Award, reflecting assumptions that managerial buy-in drives sector-wide change. Yet research questions this: frontline staff often adapt creatively to tools despite limited formal training, suggesting the much-cited 'skills gap' may overstate barriers while undervaluing existing capabilities. This creates a tension—policy emphasises leadership upskilling, but overlooks broader workforce needs and risks widening divides between managers and carers.

Stakes are concrete. Without progress, productivity lags persist, integration with NHS services falters, and costs spiral as demand grows unchecked. Financial pressures already force tough choices: councils face rising hourly care costs (up 7% recently) and demographic pressures. Digital holds potential for efficiency gains, but uneven adoption—due to legacy systems, varying provider scale, and workforce capacity—means risks of partial implementation, cyber vulnerabilities, or exclusion of smaller providers.