Futureproof
Menu

UK dataswitch to US

Childminders

changing children's nappies, preparing meals according to dietary requirements and taking temperature. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

AI changes the edges of this job, not the middle: changing children's nappies is work software can't reach.

Your move: what you can actually do about this ↓

What shifts is assisting in developing or monitoring family timetables: the overhead at the edges, not the middle you trained for.

Your week, as this page understands it

Childminders provide day-to-day care of children in their own homes, and supervise and participate in their play, educational and other activities. The job title says “childminders”. The real job is the part underneath: changing children's nappies. That is the thing someone has to be right about.

The exposed part of this job is specific, and we won’t pretend it is coming back. But childminders is not one task. It is 34 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is changing children's nappies, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI
0%
changing shape
5%
staying human
95%

These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.

Whole-job exposure score 8 out of 100 (5–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, across 34 scored tasks. The number is the support for the sentence above it, not a headline about anyone’s future.

How we know this

What is measured: Every published task statement for childminders is rated on five dimensions: can a model produce the output, does the work need a body in a room, does it need a legally accountable person, does it depend on a person being trusted in the moment, and how much data exists. A published formula turns those five ratings into the score; the model never writes the number.

How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.

Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-05. Read the full method.

Your job, task by task

These are the official task statements for this occupation, in plain English, sorted by what the evidence says is happening to each one. The official wording sits under every line so you can check the rewrite against it.

Shifting to AI

0 tasks

Tasks today’s tools can already do most of. This is the part we will not soften: where these rows are the bulk of your week, the week changes.

Nothing in this job’s scored task list landed in this group. That is the measurement, not an editorial choice, and it is worth knowing either way.

Changing shape

2 tasks

Tasks where the machine takes the producing and a person keeps the checking, the deciding, or the answering-for-it. For most jobs this is the biggest group, and it is where "transformation, not termination" is literally visible.

  • Assisting in developing or monitoring family timetables

    The software now makes the first pass at developing, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.

    importance 70 · 6114/00
    Source: “Assist in developing or monitoring family timetables.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 53 out of 100 (46–60 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Building and tracking a family timetable is scheduling work that software does well, agreed with the parents.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Logging incidents involving children in care or sports settings

    The software now makes the first pass at incidents involving children, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.

    importance 60 · 6114/00
    Source: “Log incidents involving children in care or sports settings.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (52–60 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Incident logs follow a set format, so software can draft the write-up once the childminder describes what happened.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Staying human

32 tasks

Tasks that stay with a person, because they happen in the physical world, because the rules need someone accountable, or because the value is that a specific person does them.

  • Changing children's nappies

    This work happens in the physical world: children's nappies, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 95 · 6114/00
    Source: “Change children's nappies.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Changing a nappy is hands-on care that can only be done by a person with the child in front of them.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 1/4.

  • Providing a safe environment for children

    This work happens in the physical world: a safe environment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 95 · 6114/00
    Source: “Provide a safe environment for children.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Keeping children safe in your own home means being present, watching and stepping in when needed.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Accompanying children to and from school

    This work happens in the physical world: children, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 90 · 6114/00
    Source: “Accompany children to and from school, outings, and medical appointments.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Taking children places means physically going with them and keeping them safe.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 1/4.

  • Instructing children in health and personal habits

    This work happens in the physical world: children, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 90 · 6114/00
    Source: “Instruct children in health and personal habits, such as eating, resting, and toilet habits.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Teaching toddlers to eat, rest and use the toilet is hands-on guidance given alongside the child.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Preparing formula milk bottles for babies

    This work happens in the physical world: formula milk bottles, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 90 · 6114/00
    Source: “Prepare formula milk bottles for babies.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Making up bottles means measuring, mixing and sterilising in a kitchen, which needs hands on the equipment.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Removing hazards to create a safe environment for children

    This work happens in the physical world: hazards, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 90 · 6114/00
    Source: “Remove hazards to create a safe environment for children.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Spotting and removing hazards means being in the room and moving things.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 1/4.

  • Transporting children to and from nursery and school as part of childcare duties

    This work happens in the physical world: children, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 90 · 6114/00
    Source: “Transport children to and from nursery and school as part of childcare duties.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Driving or walking children to school is physical work that needs a person there.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 1/4.

  • Discussing children's progress with parents and carers

    The value here is that a specific person handles children's progress and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 85 · 6114/00
    Source: “Discuss children's progress with parents and carers.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (14–28 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Software can write up how a child is getting on, but parents want that conversation with the person who actually minds their child.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

Show the other 24 tasks

  • Recording play and meal schedules for children in the nursery

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: play, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 70 · 6114/00
    Source: “Record play and meal schedules for children in the nursery.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 39 out of 100 (32–46 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Nursery apps already record meals and play, though someone present has to see what happened.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Requesting medical assistance

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: medical assistance, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 80 · 6114/00
    Source: “Request medical assistance when necessary.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (14–28 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Knowing a child in your care needs a doctor depends on being with them, even though making the call is straightforward.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Reporting child safety concerns to the relevant authorities

    staying human

    The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for child safety concerns, and that person cannot be a piece of software.

    importance 85 · 6114/00
    Source: “Report child safety concerns to the relevant authorities.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 20 out of 100 (13–27 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it.

    The rating behind it: Report writing can be supported, but a named adult must judge the concern and make the referral.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Planning and delivering age-appropriate educational activities to support children's learning and development using a range of teaching strategies

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: age-appropriate educational activities, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 75 · 6114/00
    Source: “Plan and deliver age-appropriate educational activities to support children's learning and development using a range of teaching strategies.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 20 out of 100 (13–27 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Planning activities from early years guidance is easy to generate, but delivering them means sitting on the floor with the children.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Designing and implementing engaging learning activities to inspire and educating participants

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: activities, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 60 · 6114/00
    Source: “Design and implement engaging learning activities to inspire and educate participants.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 16 out of 100 (9–23 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Activities are easy to design, but running them so people engage means being there with the group.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Supervising and assisting children with their homework to enhance their understanding

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: children, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 80 · 6114/00
    Source: “Supervise and assist children with their homework to enhance their understanding.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 10 out of 100 (3–17 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Homework help can be explained by software, but supervising children while they work means an adult in the room.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Instructing children about the dangers of fire

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: children, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 70 · 6114/00
    Source: “Instruct children about the dangers of fire.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 8 out of 100 (1–15 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Fire-safety information is easy to write, but young children learn it from an adult they trust.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Observing and interpreting a child's behaviour to monitor the effectiveness of their treatment

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: a child's behaviour, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 65 · 6114/00
    Source: “Observe and interpret a child's behaviour to monitor the effectiveness of their treatment.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 7 out of 100 (0–14 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Reading a child behaviour depends on watching them closely in person over time.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Implementing disciplinary measures to manage children's behaviour

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: disciplinary measures, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 80 · 6114/00
    Source: “Implement disciplinary measures to manage children's behaviour.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (0–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Setting boundaries with a child works because of who is saying it and being there, not because of the words alone.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Organising and supervising games and other recreational activities to promote physical

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: games, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 80 · 6114/00
    Source: “Organise and supervise games and other recreational activities to promote physical, mental, and social development.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (2–10 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Supervising children at games and activities has to be done in person.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Allocating appropriate chores to encourage self-control

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: appropriate chores, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 80 · 6114/00
    Source: “Allocate appropriate chores to encourage self-control, self-confidence, and responsibility.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 4 out of 100 (0–11 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Giving a child jobs to build confidence works because a trusted adult is asking them.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Praising targeted behaviours to reinforce development of self-control

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: targeted behaviours, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 80 · 6114/00
    Source: “Praise targeted behaviours to reinforce development of self-control, self-confidence, and responsibility.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 1 out of 100 (0–5 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Praise works because it comes from an adult the child knows and is there with them.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 4/4 · how much data exists 1/4.

  • Encouraging concern for others to enhance communication skills

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: concern, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 75 · 6114/00
    Source: “Encourage concern for others to enhance communication skills.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 1 out of 100 (0–5 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Teaching a child to care about others happens through everyday moments with someone they trust.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 4/4 · how much data exists 1/4.

  • Modeling appropriate social behaviours to cultivate development of interpersonal relationships

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: appropriate social behaviours, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 75 · 6114/00
    Source: “Model appropriate social behaviours to cultivate development of interpersonal relationships.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 1 out of 100 (0–5 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Children copy the adults in front of them, so this depends entirely on a person being there.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 4/4 · how much data exists 1/4.

  • Administering first aid or cardiopulmonary resuscitation

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: first aid, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 85 · 6114/00
    Source: “Administer first aid or cardiopulmonary resuscitation.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: First aid or resuscitation for a child needs a trained adult's hands right there.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Offering safe play activities, both indoors and outdoors

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: safe play activities, both indoors and outdoors, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 85 · 6114/00
    Source: “Offer safe play activities, both indoors and outdoors.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Offering play indoors and outdoors means being there with the children, setting things up and watching over them.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Preparing meals according to dietary requirements

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: meals, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 85 · 6114/00
    Source: “Prepare meals according to dietary requirements.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Planning the menu is easy for software, but cooking the meal is physical work.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Preparing meals following health and safety guidelines

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: meals following health, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 85 · 6114/00
    Source: “Prepare meals following health and safety guidelines.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Cooking a meal is physical work in a kitchen, even though the hygiene rules and recipes are easy to look up.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Serving meals and snacks in accordance with nutritional guidelines

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: meals, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 85 · 6114/00
    Source: “Serve meals and snacks in accordance with nutritional guidelines.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Putting food on the table for children is physical work, whatever the nutrition guidance says.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Taking temperature, transport children to the GP or administering medications

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: temperature, transport children, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 85 · 6114/00
    Source: “Take temperature, transport children to the GP, or administer medications as directed.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Taking a temperature or giving medicine means physically caring for the child.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Tidying up and cleaning rooms used by the children

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: and cleaning rooms, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 85 · 6114/00
    Source: “Tidy up and clean rooms used by the children.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Tidying and cleaning rooms is physical work.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 1/4.

  • Regulating children's rest periods and nap schedules

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: children's rest periods, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 80 · 6114/00
    Source: “Regulate children's rest periods and nap schedules.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–7 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence, and it moved between repeat runs, so the range is widened.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Settling children into naps and keeping to the schedule happens in the room.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 1/4.

  • Teaching age-appropriate activities, such as lap play, reading and arts and crafts, to children

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: age-appropriate activities, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 80 · 6114/00
    Source: “Teach age-appropriate activities, such as lap play, reading, and arts and crafts, to children.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Lap play, shared reading and crafts happen with an adult sitting alongside the child.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Shopping for groceries, clothing and other items needed for children's care

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: groceries, clothing and other items, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 75 · 6114/00
    Source: “Shop for groceries, clothing, and other items needed for children's care.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–10 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence, and it moved between repeat runs, so the range is widened.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Shopping for the children food and clothes means going out and carrying it back.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

What this job pays, and how many people do it

Median pay
£24,300a year, before tax, the middle of the range, so half earn more and half earn less.ashe-t14, 2025 · ASHE 2025 provisional (reference April 2025)Provisional, because the ONS revises this figure in the autumn.
How we know this

Source: ashe-t14

Reference period: ASHE 2025 provisional (reference April 2025)

Rounding: Shown to the nearest £100. The exact published figure is in the downloadable dataset. We do not render pounds the survey cannot support.

People doing this job
42,900in the UK, 2026.nomis-aps · Apr 2025-Mar 2026 (latest APS 12-month period)This headcount comes from a survey, not a census, so treat it as a good estimate rather than an exact count.

What is deliberately not here: a forecast of how many of these jobs exist in ten years. Where an official projection exists for a market we publish it with its vintage; where it does not, we leave the space empty rather than borrow the other country’s number.

Why this is shifting

The reason is boringly specific. Most of what is shifting here is reading one thing and writing another: developing in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: assisting in developing or monitoring family timetables. What it cannot do is be there in the room, and that is still where children's nappies get done. Which is why this page talks about your tasks changing, not your job ending.

Your move

Over a pint: what I’d tell you if you were my friend

Start with what does not change: changing children's nappies is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.

So, given all that: 0% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 5% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 95% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 34 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.

So the thing worth your attention is not the job going away. It is the layer around it. Assisting in developing or monitoring family timetables is the part turning into software, and being the person who understands that layer is worth money.

This week: one thing

Ask the one question. Find whoever is bringing new software into your workplace (the manager, the office, whoever runs the system) and ask them what it is meant to do to developing, and what it is not meant to touch. Ten minutes, this week, before anyone decides it for you.

What you end up holding
a straight answer about what is actually being rolled out, and when
How long it takes
ten minutes

If there’s nobody obvious to ask, or you’d rather not ask your manager: Put the same question to your union rep, your shift lead or the person who has been there longest, in person, over a break. Same ten minutes, same answer, and you will usually get a straighter one. Write down what they say. The note is the artifact, and it tells you whether children's nappies are in scope or not. Nothing to log into, no licence needed.

Over the next 90 days

Get inside the tool rollout rather than waiting for it. Over the next ninety days, ask to be in the group that tests, checks or signs off whatever new system arrives near assisting in developing or monitoring family timetables. It is usually an unglamorous seat that nobody fights for, and it is the one that decides how the software is used on your job rather than to it.

Over the next 12 months

On this evidence I would not retrain out of this job, and I will say that plainly rather than hedge it. The task list here is dominated by work that stays with a person. What I would do with a year is get formally recognised for the layer around it (the systems, the compliance, the planning), so you are the one who understands the software instead of the one it is done to. Before you pay for anything, spend an hour with National Careers Service. It is free and government-funded, and it is listed below with the rest of the free routes.

The roads out of here

You did not come here for a career change and I am not selling you one. But one road out of here is worth knowing about, so here it is with the bill attached.

  • ChildmindersNannies and au pairs

    a year or morematched on shared tasks

    One of the tasks on your list is on theirs in the same words: “change children's nappies”. Take both published task lists together and about 81% of the work in that job that the software is not taking is work you are doing today.

    Half of what they do, you do already. The argument is about the other half, not about starting again.

    The work the two jobs share

    • You already do

      “Change children's nappies.”

      They do

      “Change children's nappies.”

    • You already do

      “Transport children to and from nursery and school as part of childcare duties.”

      They do

      “Transport children to and from nursery and school as part of childcare duties.”

    • You already do

      “Accompany children to and from school, outings, and medical appointments.”

      They do

      “Accompany children to and from school, outings, and medical appointments.”

    What you would not already have: Nothing in your task list touches “bathe children”, “teach basic hygiene practices” or “facilitate playful, sensitive interactions that reflect children's needs to extend deep level…”. That is the part you would be learning from scratch, and it is roughly the 19% of their durable work you do not already hold.

    The honest bill

    Pay: £38,400 against your £24,300 (ASHE Table 14.7a, 2025 provisional (both)).

    • The licence gate: Default-closed. This release carries no licence-register snapshot, so I could not check whether that job is regulated, which means I have to assume it might be. Before you spend a penny, look it up on the GOV.UK register of regulated professions; the free routes below link straight to it. The route is banded a year or more because of that unknown, not in spite of it.
    • The entry ticket: Typical entry-level education is published for only ten occupations in this release, and neither this job nor that one is among them. So I cannot tell you whether a qualification stands in the way. Treat that as an open question to settle before you commit, not as a green light.
    • What the pay gap is telling you: £38,447 against your £24,278, 58.4% more (ASHE Table 14.7a, 2025 provisional (both)). A real difference, not a life-changing one. Take the move for the work, not the raise.
    • What you live on meanwhile: Nobody is going to pay you to retrain. This is evenings and weekends alongside the job you already have, for a year or more, and if that is not possible right now then this route is not open right now, which is worth knowing before you start. The free, government-funded careers service listed below will talk the funding through with you before you pay anyone.
    • Is the target job itself holding up: Nannies and au pairs scores 8/100 on this site’s own exposure measure (minimal), with 1% of its tasks in the top band. Employment projections are not published for this occupation in this release, so this is the exposure leg of the check only. It passed, which is the only reason it is here.

    How long: A year or more, part-time, alongside the job you have. That band is set by the unchecked licence question and by the 19% of their work you would be learning, not by any one course.

    See what AI is doing to nannies and au pairs

3 moves I checked and rejected

These are the obvious-looking jumps. They are here with their reasons rather than quietly dropped, because the ones that fail are worth knowing about. It is one less thing to turn over at night.

  • Early education and childcare assistants

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “change children's nappies”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 32% of the work in that job the software is not taking.

    Why I am not recommending it: It is closer than most, and still not close enough: about 32% of that job's durable work is already yours, against the 35% I want to see before I will call something a route.

    Look at that job’s page anyway →

  • Playworkers

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already provide a safe environment for children, and their equivalent is to supervise children's activities in a safe environment. Across both published task lists that is about 27% of the durable work in that job.

    Why I am not recommending it: It is closer than most, and still not close enough: about 27% of that job's durable work is already yours, against the 35% I want to see before I will call something a route. This release publishes no median pay for that job, so I cannot show you what the move costs or pays. I do not recommend a move I cannot price.

    Look at that job’s page anyway →

  • Early education and childcare practitioners

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “change children's nappies”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 19% of the work in that job the software is not taking.

    Why I am not recommending it: You would be starting most of it from nothing: about 19% of the durable work in that job is work you do today, and the rest you would be learning while the bills carried on.

    Look at that job’s page anyway →

What I’d stop worrying about

A friend tells you what not to spend fear on. This is that list.

  • The headline number you read somewhere

    The big “X% of jobs” figures are about the whole economy, not about you. The number that describes your job is on this page: 0% of its task weight, across 34 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.

  • The headlines about your trade disappearing

    They are usually about the technology, not the timetable. Changes to work like changing children's nappies arrive through rules, insurance and money, slowly and visibly. This page tracks the task evidence and will move when it moves.

  • Retraining out of a job that is holding up

    On this evidence I would not spend money leaving. Spend it on the layer around the job instead: the tools, the paperwork, the planning. That is where the change actually is.

  • The “obvious” next job everyone suggests

    I checked the obvious moves and most of them did not survive. The reasons are printed with the routes above, including the pay and the gate. A move that fails on the numbers is worth knowing about so you can stop turning it over at night.

If you run a team doing this job

If you run a team doing this job, the conversation you owe them is the one on this page, and sooner than feels comfortable. Show them the ledger rather than a reassurance: the rows moving toward the software are assisting in developing or monitoring family timetables, and the rows that are not are where you want your people visible. Ask each of them to do the this-week move and bring the list to your next one-to-one. It turns a rumour into a piece of work, and it tells you which parts of your team's week are actually at stake. And say the thing out loud that a team lead usually leaves unsaid: a shrinking team is your exposure too, so do the move yourself as well.

You are reading the United Kingdom figures

The United States splits this work across more than one official group, of which First-Line Supervisors of Entertainment and Recreation Workers, Except Gambling Services is the closest. The pay and employment figures are not directly comparable, and we do not average them together.

Switch to the United States page →partial match

The other groups this work is counted across:

In US official statistics this job is counted as First-Line Supervisors of Entertainment and Recreation Workers, Except Gambling Services, First-Line Supervisors of Personal Service Workers and Childcare Workers. Pay is shown separately for each of those groups (medians cannot be averaged together), while the task list and the scores on this page are for this group only.

Your route through this

Where to go next, and what it costs

Free, and complete

The moves above cost nothing. These are the real services that go with them: public, government-funded, and free at the point of use. Nothing on this page is behind an email address or a payment.

Why there is no community here

Collab365, who build this site, run paid Spaces for a small number of subjects, and none of them is built for this job. We are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.

So the free services listed on this page are the whole answer, and it is the same answer we would give a friend.

Nearby moves

The jobs above, as pages you can read the same way as this one. Your job shares its core work with these. That is what the match is, and it is all it is.

Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for childminders launches. Nothing else.

That did not look like an email address, so nothing was saved. Have another go below.

We could not save that. The fault is ours, not yours, and your address was not stored. Please try again later.

No Space for childminders yet. Should there be one?

Collab365 Spaces is built by the same people as this site. We find the problems that AI and automation are creating inside one kind of work, then solve them as short courses, briefings and Blueprints. Each Space is the community too, so the research and the people doing your job are in the same place.

What a Space actually is, in full

Collab365 launches new communities where the need is real. If one for childminders existed, with researched problems, courses and people in the same boat, would you want in?

We use your email address for one thing: to tell you if a Space for childminders launches. We never sell it, never use it for unrelated marketing, and every email has a one-click unsubscribe. Our privacy policy has the full version.

This unlocks nothing. Every figure, every row and every step on this page is already yours, whether you fill this in or not.

No deadline on any of this. The page will still be here, and the data is refreshed on a published schedule rather than when someone wants a headline.

Questions people ask about this job

Will AI replace Childminders?
Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 34 official task statements scored for Childminders (United Kingdom, SOC 6114), 0% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 8 out of 100 (range 5–13, band: minimal). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.
Which tasks in “Childminders” can AI already do?
The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Log incidents involving children in care or sports settings” (56/100, partial); “Assist in developing or monitoring family timetables” (53/100, partial); “Record play and meal schedules for children in the nursery” (39/100, low). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.
Which tasks in “Childminders” stay human?
About 95% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Shop for groceries, clothing, and other items needed for children's care” (0/100, minimal); “Teach age-appropriate activities, such as lap play, reading, and arts and crafts, to children” (0/100, minimal); “Regulate children's rest periods and nap schedules” (0/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.
What should someone working in “Childminders” do about AI?
Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 0% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 95% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.
How is the AI exposure score for Childminders calculated?
Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 34 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.

Where these numbers come from

About the data on this page

  • Provisional, because the ONS revises this figure in the autumn.
  • This headcount comes from a survey, not a census, so treat it as a good estimate rather than an exact count.
  • 2 tasks scored differently between repeat runs, so their range on this page is wider. We would rather show the wobble than hide it.
  • The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
  • 11 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
  • Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.
Task statements
gaisi-indexProcessing: catalogue-bridge → ssc-relatedness-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
Task weights
gaisi-index (relatedness)
Scores
Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-05.
Pay and employment
ashe-t14 (ASHE 2025 provisional (reference April 2025))nomis-aps (Apr 2025-Mar 2026 (latest APS 12-month period))

Figures on this page come from release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Every release keeps its own permanent address, so a figure you cite in March is still there, unchanged, in November.

The plain-English wording on this page is assembled directly from the task statements and the published ratings, not written by hand for this occupation. That is why it is specific, and it is also why we say so.

The routes and free resources further up are today’s, not the release’s (last reviewed 2026-08-05). A route is an offer, not a historical fact, so it moves on its own clock.

How we score a jobDownload this releaseLook up another job

Using these figures?

Cite this

Everything on this site is published under CC BY 4.0. Quote it, chart it, sell something built on it. Just say where it came from, and cite the dated release rather than the site, so the figure you quote stays checkable.

Plain text

Collab365 (2026). Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1 (methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0). https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1. Licensed CC BY 4.0. Built with O*NET data (USDOL/ETA, CC BY 4.0); ONS data (Open Government Licence v3.0); GAISI task framework (arXiv:2507.22748, MIT); BLS data (public domain).

BibTeX

@misc{collab365futureproof2026q41,
  title        = {Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1},
  author       = {{Collab365}},
  year         = {2026},
  url          = {https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1},
  note         = {Release 2026-q4.1, methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0, CC BY 4.0}
}

Permalink

https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1

Data as of release 2026-q4.1, published . Releases never change after publication; when the figures move, a new dated release is published beside this one and this one stays exactly where it is.