Findings from the 2025 adult social care provider technology survey
Published 6 March 2026
Applies to England
© Crown copyright 2026
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/technology-use-in-adult-social-care-2025-survey-results/findings-from-the-2025-adult-social-care-provider-technology-survey
Summary
This survey aimed to understand care technology adoption among adult social care providers and barriers to further adoption.
Over a quarter of respondents (27%) reported not using any care technologies to deliver care and support.
Across all providers, the most common technology used for care and support was ‘monitoring equipment with sensors’, which 43% of respondents used.
Digital social care records (DSCRs) and digital rostering tools were the most common types of business management technologies used.
Background
This report contains the findings from an adult social care provider technology survey that participants responded to in February and March 2025.
The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) and NHS England have made significant progress to digitise the adult social care sector, through the Digitising Social Care (DiSC) programme. With support of the DiSC programme, adoption of DSCRs by registered care providers has increased from 41% in December 2021 to 80% in July 2025 (77% at the time of this survey in March).
The government’s ambition is that all care providers are fully digitised by the end of this Parliament. A fully digitised care provider is defined as a Care Quality Commission (CQC) registered provider that is using an assured DSCR solution, meeting the ‘standards met’ level on the data security and protection toolkit (DSPT).
The government is committed to continuing to support the adoption of care technologies to transform adult social care through:
- improving quality of care
- supporting people to live independently at home
- joining up services
This includes setting new national standards for care technologies and joining up health and care data.
The survey sought to understand:
- the status of care technology adoption among adult social care providers in England as of March 2025
- perceived barriers to further adoption
- connectivity status
This will inform policy development and provide information on technology adoption to the sector.
Methodology
This was a voluntary survey completed by registered managers and nominated individuals of CQC-registered adult social care providers. They were contacted with a link to the survey through the Capacity Tracker email list.
Responses were collected at single-location level. Respondents may be registered managers, nominated individuals or both.
The survey did not ask whether the respondent was answering on behalf of a location or organisation, so responses may refer to care technology adoption at provider location level or provider organisation level (multiple locations). However, given the topic of the survey it is likely that respondents considered all locations they oversee in their responses. Throughout this analysis, we will use the term ‘provider’ to refer to all respondents, referring to both individual provider locations and provider organisations.
The purpose of the survey was to gather information on:
- the types of technology being used by care providers
- main barriers that providers face in adopting care technology
- how care providers find out information about care technology
- the infrastructure (connectivity) needed for care technologies to function effectively
This survey built on questions asked in a care provider survey for the 2021 Ipsos Mori and NHSX Adult Social Care Technology and Digital Skills Review.
Definitions
Technology types
The survey used categories for 2 types of technology: care technology and business support technology. These are the same as in the 2021 Ipsos Mori survey.
The care technology categories were:
- video conferencing
- monitoring equipment with sensors (such as falls prevention tech or acoustic monitoring tech)
- personal alarms
- health and wellbeing apps
- audio assistants (such as smart speakers)
- voice-operated or remote-controlled tech (such as voice-operated doors)
- virtual reality
- smartwatches
The business management technology categories were:
- video conferencing
- financial accounting software
- digital rostering
- DSCRs
- HR management
- electronic medicine administration records (e-MAR)
- audio assistants
Provider size, support settings and service types
Respondents were asked the question ‘How many people do you typically provide services to?’ We are unable to distinguish a provider location response from a provider organisation response as the survey did not ask whether the respondent was answering on behalf of a location or organisation. Therefore, responses to this question cannot be used to determine the number of people supported at an individual provider location or within a wider provider organisation.
For this analysis we have defined the size of care provider by the number of people supported:
- micro provider: 1 to 10 people supported
- small provider: 11 to 50 people supported
- medium provider: 51 to 200 people supported
- large provider: 200 or more people supported
The service types and support settings were categorised using CQC registration definitions.
Results
Characteristics of respondents
The survey was answered by 1,085 care providers. Nearly half of respondents (49%) were small providers supporting 11 to 50 people. Almost a quarter (23%) were micro providers supporting 10 people or fewer.
Figure 1: respondents by provider size, % of total respondents
| Provider size | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Small | 49% |
| Medium | 24% |
| Micro | 23% |
| Large | 4% |
Most respondents were providing domiciliary care services (57%), while one-third (33%) were residential.
Figure 2: respondents by support setting, % of total respondents
| Support setting | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Domiciliary | 57% |
| Residential | 33% |
| Supported living | 6% |
| Both domiciliary and residential | 3% |
| Other | 1% |
Providers with smaller numbers of supported users tended to be delivering domiciliary care, while providers supporting more people were more varied.
Figure 3: respondents by support setting, % of provider size
| Provider size | Residential | Domiciliary | Both domiciliary and residential | Supported living | Other | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Micro | 24% | 66% | 1% | 9% | 1% | 100% |
| Small | 40% | 52% | 2% | 5% | 2% | 100% |
| Medium | 28% | 63% | 4% | 5% | 1% | 100% |
| Large | 35% | 33% | 21% | 6% | 4% | 100% |
Note: percentages are rounded, so the individual percentages in each row (and stacked bars) may not sum to exactly 100%.
Providing care for a mix of ages was more common than a specific age range: 43% of respondents provided care to a mix of ages.
Figure 4: respondents by age group supported, % of total respondents
| Age group of people supported | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Mixed | 43% |
| Older adults (65+) | 34% |
| Working-age adults (18 to 65) | 23% |
The most common service type after ‘general’ was dementia. Sixty per cent of respondents said they provided dementia care.
Figure 5: respondents by service type, % of all respondents
| Service type | Percentage |
|---|---|
| General | 64% |
| Dementia | 60% |
| Physical disability | 49% |
| Learning disability | 44% |
| Mental health | 42% |
| Other | 7% |
Note: multiple answers were possible.
Types of care technologies used
Care technologies used to provide care and support
Over a quarter of respondents (27%) reported not using any care technologies to provide care and support. Of the micro provider respondents, 40% reported not using any care technologies to deliver care and support.
Figure 6: care providers using care tech for care and support, % of total respondents
| Provider size | Use at least one type of care tech | Do not use care tech | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Micro | 60% | 40% | 100% |
| Small | 78% | 22% | 100% |
| Medium | 72% | 28% | 100% |
| Large | 89% | 11% | 100% |
| Overall | 73% | 27% | 100% |
Note: respondents that ‘do not use care tech’ selected only ‘none’ to the question ‘please select the care technologies you use to deliver care and support’. The 20 respondents who selected ‘none’ and another technology have been excluded.
Across all respondents, the most common technology used for care and support was ‘monitoring equipment with sensors’, which 43% of respondents used.
Figure 7: types of care technologies used for care and support, % of all respondents
| Care technology | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Virtual reality | 3% |
| Voice-operated or remote-controlled tech | 5% |
| Smartwatches | 6% |
| Audio assistants | 14% |
| Health and wellbeing apps | 25% |
| Video conferencing | 34% |
| Personal alarms | 35% |
| Monitoring equipment with sensors | 43% |
Note: multiple answers were possible.
Across all care technology categories, a higher proportion of respondents from large providers used technology for care and support compared with those from smaller providers. For example, 64% of respondents from large providers used personal alarms compared with 38% from small providers. Larger provider respondents were more likely to use care technologies than smaller providers, with the exception of health and wellbeing apps, which were used consistently across provider sizes.
Figure 8: types of care technologies used for care and support, % of provider size
| Care technology | Micro | Small | Medium | Large |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Video conferencing | 25% | 36% | 34% | 55% |
| Monitoring equipment with sensors (such as falls prevention tech or acoustic monitoring tech) | 20% | 48% | 50% | 57% |
| Personal alarms | 18% | 38% | 40% | 64% |
| Health and wellbeing apps | 21% | 25% | 28% | 23% |
| Audio assistants (such as smart speakers) | 7% | 15% | 17% | 36% |
Note: multiple answers were possible. Only the top 5 answers are shown.
Care technologies used for business management
Care technologies are also used to support business management. For example, DSCRs are software solutions for recording a person’s care information, replacing paper records. They enable sharing of up-to-date information more easily and securely, and reduce time spent on administrative tasks.
DSCRs and digital rostering tools were the most common types of business management technologies selected. At the time of the survey (February and March 2025), 73% of respondents used a DSCR. Adoption of DSCRs by CQC-registered providers has increased from 41% in December 2021 to 80% as of July 2025 after support for the sector from the DiSC programme.
DSCR adoption is reported separately, using a different data collection method, on a quarterly basis and there are more recent statistics available. See Adult social care provider statistics, England: quarterly update for more information.
Figure 9: types of business management technologies used to support day-to-day management, % of all respondents
| Business management technology | Percentage |
|---|---|
| None | 6% |
| Audio assistants | 6% |
| HR management | 51% |
| Financial accounting software | 52% |
| e-MAR | 53% |
| Video conferencing | 53% |
| Digital rostering | 63% |
| DSCRs | 73% |
Note: multiple answers were possible.
Like care technologies used to provide care and support, a higher proportion of respondents from large providers used technology for business management compared with those from small providers. For example, 90% of respondents from large care providers used financial accounting software compared with 49% from small providers.
Figure 10: types of business management technologies used to support day-to-day management, % of provider type
| Business management technology | Micro | Small | Medium | Large |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Video conferencing | 40% | 52% | 63% | 85% |
| Financial accounting software | 34% | 49% | 70% | 90% |
| Digital rostering | 52% | 58% | 81% | 81% |
| DSCRs | 57% | 77% | 79% | 88% |
| HR management | 45% | 49% | 56% | 71% |
| e-MAR | 37% | 54% | 67% | 58% |
Note: multiple answers were possible.
Barriers to adoption of care technologies
The survey also aimed to understand the barriers to adoption of care technologies by respondents. Cost of technology and licensing fees were the most frequently selected barriers to adoption, followed by staff training and cyber and data security.
Figure 11: barriers to adopting care technology during the next 5 years, % of all respondents
| Barrier | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Set-up cost of the technology | 73% |
| Ongoing licence cost of the technology | 70% |
| Staff training costs and high staff turnover | 52% |
| Cost of cyber and data security | 41% |
| The availability of good internet connectivity | 40% |
| Service user reluctance to use the technology | 39% |
| Lack of digital skills among staff | 39% |
| Lack of digital skills among care recipients | 39% |
| Staff reluctance to use the technology | 34% |
| Concerns with replacing face-to-face care | 30% |
Note: multiple answers were possible. Only the top 10 answers are shown.
Figure 12: support needed to overcome the barriers to adopting care technology, % of all respondents
| Type of support | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Funding support (ongoing costs) | 82% |
| Funding support (upfront costs) | 67% |
| Upskilling of the workforce | 58% |
| Assurance that the care technology is safe | 44% |
| Information to better understand the technologies available | 41% |
| Improvement in technology infrastructure (such as wifi and broadband) | 41% |
| Inspection guidance and regulation | 40% |
| Information to better understand the benefits that technology can bring | 31% |
Note: multiple answers were possible.
Connectivity
For many care technologies to be effective, sufficient connectivity is required.
When asked about connectivity requirements, at the time of the survey 39% of respondents were unsure whether they would need faster broadband in the next 3 years. Out of those that did know, most thought that they would require faster broadband.
Figure 13: minimum broadband speed required currently and in 3 years, % of respondents
| Broadband speed required | Currently | In 3 years |
|---|---|---|
| Basic broadband: 10 Mbps | 11% | 2% |
| Superfast broadband: 30 Mbps | 26% | 13% |
| Ultrafast broadband: 300 Mbps | 19% | 26% |
| Gigabit broadband: 1 Gbps+ (1,000 Mbps) | 5% | 18% |
| Unsure | 38% | 39% |
| Other | 2% | 1% |
Note: blank responses removed from count.
Figure 14: difference in connectivity requirements now and in 3 years’ time, % of respondents
| Connectivity requirement | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Unsure | 44% |
| Faster connectivity needed | 33% |
| Same connectivity needed | 19% |
| Slower connectivity needed | 1% |
| Other | 3% |
Figure 15: does the current broadband provider offer a higher-speed broadband service, % of respondents
| Response | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Yes | 44% |
| No | 3% |
| Unsure | 11% |
| Other | 42% |
Nearly half of the respondents said their service users organise their own wifi. Over one-third said their service users have wifi included in their care plan.
Figure 16: how service users pay for wifi provision, % of respondents
| Payment method | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Organise their own wifi | 47% |
| Included within normal care plan | 37% |
| Additional charge (on top of normal care plan) | 4% |
| Other | 13% |
This may reflect the proportion of respondents from domiciliary care providers, as wifi provision varies by provider type. Respondents working in domiciliary care were more likely to report that their service users organise their own wifi (68%), whereas respondents working in residential care were more likely to say their service users have wifi included in their normal care plan.
Provision of wifi did not vary significantly by provider size.
Figure 17: how service users pay for wifi provision by provider type, % of respondents
| Provider type | Included within normal care plan | Organise their own wifi | Additional charge (on top of normal care plan) | Other | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Residential | 77% | 13% | 4% | 6% | 100 % |
| Domiciliary | 14% | 68% | 3% | 15% | 100 % |
| Both residential and domiciliary | 48% | 28% | 0% | 24% | 100 % |
| Supported living | 27% | 38% | 17% | 18% | 100 % |
Figure 18: how service users pay for wifi provision by provider size, % of respondents
| Provider size | Included within normal care plan | Organise their own wifi | Additional charge (on top of normal care plan) | Other | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Micro | 36% | 46% | 5% | 14% | 100% |
| Small | 38% | 46% | 4% | 13% | 100% |
| Medium | 35% | 50% | 4% | 11% | 100% |
| Large | 46% | 40% | 0% | 15% | 100% |
Note: percentages are rounded, so the individual percentages in each row (and stacked bars) may not sum to exactly 100%.
Figure 19: whether the provider has appropriate infrastructure or equipment to allow devices to access internet connectivity from all locations within their care homes (% of residential care provider respondents only)
| Response | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Yes | 70% |
| No | 14% |
| Unsure | 10% |
| Other | 6% |
Seventy per cent of respondents from residential care providers said they had the appropriate infrastructure to allow devices to connect to the internet from all locations within care homes. Only 14% said they did not have this infrastructure to support connectivity from all locations. When looking at respondents from large providers, one-third did not have the infrastructure to support connectivity across all locations in their care homes.
Figure 20: whether the provider has appropriate infrastructure or equipment to allow devices to access internet connectivity from all locations within their care homes (% of provider size, residential care providers only)
| Provider size | Yes | No | Unsure | Other | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Micro | 62% | 17% | 17% | 3% | 100% |
| Small | 70% | 13% | 10% | 7% | 100% |
| Medium | 76% | 8% | 8% | 9% | 100% |
| Large | 56% | 33% | 0% | 11% | 100% |
| Overall | 70% | 14% | 10% | 6% | 100% |
Note: percentages are rounded, so the individual percentages in each row (and stacked bars) may not sum to exactly 100%.
Limitations and caveats
As noted in the methodology section, respondents may be registered managers, nominated individuals or both. Therefore, responses may refer to care technology adoption at provider location level or provider organisation level (multiple locations).
We are unable to distinguish a provider location response from a provider organisation response. This means responses cannot be used to determine the number of people supported at an individual location or within a wider organisation.
Due to the number of survey responses and the limitations above, survey findings should not be used to determine planning for the adult social care sector as a whole.
It is expected that the care technology survey will run annually. Ongoing improvements may impact direct comparison with results from previous years.