Will AI replace Housing officers?

Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 41 official task statements scored for Housing officers (United Kingdom, SOC 3223), 29% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 45 out of 100 (range 39–52, band: partial). 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 “Housing officers” can AI already do?

The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Collect data relevant to housing, such as health, employment and demographics” (93/100, very high); “Compile statistical data and generate detailed reports” (93/100, very high); “Identify good practice in housing” (83/100, very high). 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 “Housing officers” stay human?

About 44% 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: “Attend court hearings” (0/100, minimal); “Address problems with squatters in properties” (4/100, minimal); “Implement strategies to reduce anti-social behaviour in communities” (5/100, 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 “Housing officers” do about AI?

Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 29% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 44% 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 Housing officers 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 41 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.

UK dataswitch to US

Housing officers

assessing the needs of people applying for housing, referring cases to the neighbourhood antisocial behaviour team and coordinating with housing, police, local councils. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

AI is already taking a real slice of the routine work here: collecting data. That is a slice of tasks, not of you.

Your move: what you can actually do about this ↓

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 29%
changing shape: 27%
staying human: 44%

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

Whole-job exposure score 45 out of 100 (39–52 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, across 41 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 housing officers 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 2026-08-04. Read the full method.

That slice is not coming back; the core of the job, encouraging and supporting tenants and residents associations, stays yours. The tools change, the responsibility doesn't.

Your week, as this page understands it

Housing officers assess and address housing needs of particular localities and individuals and oversee the day-to-day management of rented properties belonging to local authorities or housing associations. The job title says “housing officers”. The real job is the part underneath: encouraging and supporting tenants and residents associations. 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 housing officers is not one task. It is 41 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is encouraging and supporting tenants and residents associations, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 29%
changing shape: 27%
staying human: 44%

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

How we know this

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 2026-08-04. 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.

One row is marked low confidence, so treat it as a ballpark rather than a fine measurement.
7 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.

Shifting to AI

12 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.

Processing housing applications
This is reading one thing and writing another: applications in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 3223/00
Source: “Process housing applications.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 81 out of 100 (77–85 allowing for uncertainty): very high 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: Checking applications against set criteria is exactly the sort of form processing software already does.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Collecting data
This is reading one thing and writing another: data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 70 · 3223/00
Source: “Collect data relevant to housing, such as health, employment and demographics.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 93 out of 100 (89–97 allowing for uncertainty): very high 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: Pulling together health, employment and population figures is data work that software does quickly and accurately.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Setting and reviewing rent prices
This is reading one thing and writing another: rent prices in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 70 · 3223/00
Source: “Set and review rent prices.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 81 out of 100 (74–88 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, medium 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: Social rents follow a published formula applied to data the landlord holds, so software calculates and reviews them for approval.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Managing budgets to ensure efficient use of resources
This is reading one thing and writing another: budgets in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 70 · 3223/00
Source: “Manage budgets to ensure efficient use of resources.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (68–82 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium 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: Managing a budget against actual spend is standard finance system work.
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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Changing shape

11 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.

Managing payments and arrears for rent
The software now makes the first pass at payments, 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 80 · 3223/00
Source: “Manage payments and arrears for rent.” (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: Rent accounts and arrears letters are handled well by software, though chasing debt involves difficult conversations.
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.
Administering collections to ensure timely rent payments
The software now makes the first pass at collections, 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 80 · 3223/00
Source: “Administer collections to ensure timely rent payments.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 46 out of 100 (39–53 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: Arrears processes are largely automated, but tenants in difficulty need a person who can listen and agree a way forward.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Directing individuals seeking assistance to appropriate benefits and welfare advisory services
The software now makes the first pass at individuals seeking assistance, 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 75 · 3223/00
Source: “Direct individuals seeking assistance to appropriate benefits and welfare advisory services.” (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: Benefits and services are documented, so signposting is easy for software, though people in difficulty want a person.
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.

Staying human

18 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.

Assessing the needs of people applying for housing
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for the needs of people, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 85 · 3223/00
Source: “Assess the needs of people applying for housing.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 30 out of 100 (23–37 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Software can work through the eligibility rules, but a statutory housing decision still rests with a council officer who has met the applicant.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Engaging with tenant groups and local authority councillors for housing issues
The value here is that a specific person handles tenant groups and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 85 · 3223/00
Source: “Engage with tenant groups and local authority councillors for housing issues.” (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: Working with tenant groups and councillors depends on trust built over time in meetings, not on documents.
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.
Coordinating efforts with social services and other agencies to deliver comprehensive support
The value here is that a specific person handles efforts and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 80 · 3223/00
Source: “Coordinate efforts with social services and other agencies to deliver comprehensive support.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 31 out of 100 (24–38 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: Joint working with social services depends on relationships and local knowledge, though the referrals and records are routine.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

Show the other 31 tasks

Compiling statistical data and generating detailed reports
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: statistical data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 50 · 3223/00
Source: “Compile statistical data and generate detailed reports.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 93 out of 100 (89–97 allowing for uncertainty): very high 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: Pulling figures together into a clear report is one of the strongest things current software and AI do.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Identifying good practice in housing
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: good practice in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 60 · 3223/00
Source: “Identify good practice in housing.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (79–87 allowing for uncertainty): very high 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: Good practice in housing is written up publicly, and AI is strong at finding and summarising it.
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 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Researching housing issues
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: issues in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 50 · 3223/00
Source: “Research housing issues.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (79–87 allowing for uncertainty): very high 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: Desk research on housing issues draws on plenty of published material, which AI searches and summarises quickly.
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 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Setting rents according to market rates and property values
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: rents in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 60 · 3223/00
Source: “Set rents according to market rates and property values.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 81 out of 100 (74–88 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, medium 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: Comparable rents and property values are available digitally, so software proposes market rents for the landlord to approve.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Maintaining accurate records
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: accurate records in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 60 · 3223/00
Source: “Maintain accurate records.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high 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: Keeping records accurate is routine screen work software does reliably.
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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Writing and reviewing reports on housing conditions to inform policy decisions
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: reports in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 60 · 3223/00
Source: “Write and review reports on housing conditions to inform policy decisions.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high 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: Writing and reviewing condition reports from collected data is drafting and analysis that AI does well.
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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Referring cases to the neighbourhood antisocial behaviour team
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: cases in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 70 · 3223/00
Source: “Refer cases to the neighbourhood antisocial behaviour team.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 69 out of 100 (65–73 allowing for uncertainty): high 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: Deciding a case meets the referral criteria and passing it on is routine casework routing.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Developing new policies and procedures in response to government legislation
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: new policies in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 60 · 3223/00
Source: “Develop new policies and procedures in response to government legislation.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (59–73 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium 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: Turning new legislation into written policies and procedures is drafting work AI tools do well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Administering improvement loans and grants
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at improvement loans, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 60 · 3223/00
Source: “Administer improvement loans and grants.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 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; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Loan and grant administration follows published rules and paperwork that software processes well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Managing finances and controlling budgets to enhance housing services and community support
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at finances, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 60 · 3223/00
Source: “Manage finances and control budgets to enhance housing services and community support.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 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; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Budget management runs on figures and forecasts that software handles, with the officer still accountable for choices.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Monitoring and maintaining records of daily facility operations
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at records of daily facility operations, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 50 · 3223/00
Source: “Monitor and maintain records of daily facility operations.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 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; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Operational records are largely automatic once data is collected, though some checks are made around the site.
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.
Recommending corrective actions to address specific issues in compliance and operations
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at corrective actions, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 50 · 3223/00
Source: “Recommend corrective actions to address specific issues in compliance and operations.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 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; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Housing compliance rules are published and case records are digital, so software drafts recommended fixes for an officer to weigh.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Coordinating the repair of broken lifts in housing facilities
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at the repair of broken lifts, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 60 · 3223/00
Source: “Coordinate the repair of broken lifts in housing facilities.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 48 out of 100 (41–55 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; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Arranging a lift repair is scheduling and chasing contractors, though someone must confirm the work on site.
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 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Overseeing repair and maintenance programmes
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at repair, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 60 · 3223/00
Source: “Oversee repair and maintenance programmes.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 48 out of 100 (41–55 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; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Planning and tracking maintenance programmes is scheduling and reporting, though the work itself happens on site.
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 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Communicating outcomes to tenants
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at outcomes, 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 75 · 3223/00
Source: “Communicate outcomes to tenants.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 46 out of 100 (39–53 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: Decision letters are easy to draft, but explaining a refusal to someone often needs a person on the phone.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Managing the transfer of existing tenants
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at the transfer of existing tenants, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 70 · 3223/00
Source: “Manage the transfer of existing tenants.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 42 out of 100 (35–49 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; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Managing a transfer is mostly matching, paperwork and scheduling, which software handles well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Managing antisocial behaviour orders and collecting relevant information
staying human
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for antisocial behaviour orders, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 50 · 3223/00
Source: “Manage antisocial behaviour orders and collect relevant information.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 36 out of 100 (29–43 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Evidence gathering and order paperwork are well suited to software, though the legal steps need an authorised officer.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Advising individuals on financial problems for financial stability
staying human
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for individuals, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 50 · 3223/00
Source: “Advise individuals on financial problems for financial stability.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 35 out of 100 (28–42 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Money and debt advice is regulated activity expected to come from a competent person, and it depends on private household circumstances.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Coordinating with housing, police, local councils, employers and employment support workers on relevant matters
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles housing, police, local councils and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 70 · 3223/00
Source: “Coordinate with housing, police, local councils, employers, and employment support workers on relevant matters.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 31 out of 100 (24–38 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: Joint working across police, councils and employers runs on relationships and local knowledge, not just correspondence.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Participating in meetings to discuss project updates
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles meetings and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 50 · 3223/00
Source: “Participate in meetings to discuss project updates.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 30 out of 100 (23–37 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Project updates can be written up easily, but taking part in the meeting means being there.
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 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Handling breaches of tenancy and leasehold agreements
staying human
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for breaches of tenancy, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 70 · 3223/00
Source: “Handle breaches of tenancy and leasehold agreements.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 23 out of 100 (16–30 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Breach cases follow set procedures, but the council officer carries the legal responsibility and often visits the property.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Providing training for support staff to improve service delivery
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: support staff, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 3223/00
Source: “Provide training for support staff to improve service delivery.” (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: Training content can be produced automatically, but staff training is normally delivered in person.
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.
Delivering presentations on housing policies to community groups
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: presentations, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 50 · 3223/00
Source: “Deliver presentations on housing policies to community groups.” (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: Slides are easy to produce, but standing in front of a community group and answering their questions is not.
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.
Interviewing tenants and advising on tenant-landlord relationships
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles tenants and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 75 · 3223/00
Source: “Interview tenants and advise on tenant-landlord relationships, house purchasing, and benefits.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 18 out of 100 (11–25 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Benefits and tenancy rules are published, but the interview depends on trust with a specific tenant and on facts only that household knows.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Encouraging and supporting tenants and residents associations
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: tenants, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 3223/00
Source: “Encourage and support tenants and residents associations.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 14 out of 100 (7–21 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: Supporting a residents association means turning up, listening and encouraging people who know each other.
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 2/4.
Representing housing services on corporate working groups
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles services and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 60 · 3223/00
Source: “Represent housing services on corporate working groups.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 13 out of 100 (6–20 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Representing a service in a working group depends on a person being trusted to speak for it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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.
Planning and implementing slum clearance
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: slum clearance, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 3223/00
Source: “Plan and implement slum clearance.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 12 out of 100 (0–24 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, low confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Clearance programmes involve site work, politics and negotiation that go well beyond what can be planned at a desk.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Supervising hall of residence staff in their duties
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: hall of residence staff, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 50 · 3223/00
Source: “Supervise hall of residence staff in their duties.” (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: Supervising residence staff means being on site, seeing how shifts run and dealing with people directly.
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.
Implementing strategies to reduce anti-social behaviour in communities
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: strategies, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 50 · 3223/00
Source: “Implement strategies to reduce anti-social behaviour in communities.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 5 out of 100 (0–12 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: Reducing antisocial behaviour depends on wardens being visible on the estate and known locally.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Addressing problems with squatters in properties
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: problems, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 3223/00
Source: “Address problems with squatters in properties.” (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; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Dealing with squatters means being at the property and using legal powers that a council officer must exercise.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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.
Attending court hearings
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: court hearings, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 3223/00
Source: “Attend court hearings.” (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: Court hearings need someone physically present who is entitled to speak for the landlord.
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.

What this job pays, and how many people do it

Median pay: £34,700a 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: 57,900in 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: data in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: collecting data and processing housing applications. What it cannot do is be there in the room, and that is still where tenants 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

Your week is splitting in two, and which half fills it is the whole question. Collecting data is going; encouraging and supporting tenants and residents associations is not.

So, given all that: 29% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 27% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 44% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 41 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.

The occupation is an average and you are not, so the first job below is finding out where your own week actually sits.

This week: one thing

Print the task ledger above and put your own hours next to each row. Roughly, in pen, in one sitting. Then look at which group your hours actually pile up in. Twenty minutes, this week.

What you end up holding: your own week, on one page, sorted into what is shifting and what is not
How long it takes: about twenty minutes

If printing it isn’t practical: Read the rows off this page and write the same list on the back of an envelope. Same twenty minutes, same page, and it works just as well said out loud to someone who knows the job. The point is your hours next to the rows, not the paper it is on.

Over the next 90 days

Volunteer toward the durable end, visibly. Over the next ninety days put your hand up for the work in the bottom group (encouraging and supporting tenants and residents associations) and let people see you doing it. Not a new project: the same job, with your mix deliberately tilted. The point is that when the rota or the reorganisation comes, the version of you people picture is the one doing the part that stays.

Over the next 12 months

Claim a specialism at the durable end and let the other end go. Over a year, deliberately become the person who handles encouraging and supporting tenants and residents associations, and deliberately stop being the first choice for the rows in the top group. That trade costs something, because the exposed work is often the comfortable work. Decide it on purpose rather than by drift. 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, and why I am not sending you down them

I looked at the obvious moves out of this job, and here is what I found.

I checked the 12 nearest UK occupations to housing officers (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was local government administrative occupations: only about 7% of its durable work is work you already do and it pays 11.0% less. Your own job splits about 29/71: that share of the list sits in the top exposure band and the rest does not. On this evidence the honest move is inside the job rather than out of it. Become the person who owns “assess the needs of people applying for housing”, and let the exposed end go.

How that was checked: this job was compared against all 412 UK occupations in this release on their official task statements, and the 12 nearest were examined one by one. A move that turns on an industry, an employer or a qualification rather than on the work itself will not show up in a check like that. And this release carries no licence register, so anything you are weighing needs that looked up separately.

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.

Local government administrative occupations
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “advise individuals on financial problems for financial stability”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 7% of the work in that job the software is not taking.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 7% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: £30,886 against your £34,688, 11.0% less (ASHE Table 14.7a, 2025 provisional (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Health services and public health managers and directors
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already provide training for support staff to improve service delivery, and their equivalent is to manage the recruitment of staff to support healthcare service delivery. Across both published task lists that is about 4% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 4% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Social services managers and directors
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already provide training for support staff to improve service delivery, and their equivalent is to recruit, interview, or employ employees to support social service delivery. Across both published task lists that is about 4% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 4% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
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: 29% of its task weight, across 41 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.
The whole-job doom story
Nothing on this page says this job ends. It says the mix inside it moves. Half the rows above are unchanged or changing shape, and the plan is about which half your week sits in. That is a very different problem, and a solvable one.
Panic-buying a course
Do the twenty-minute sorting exercise first. Most people who buy a course before they have done it buy the wrong one, and the free services listed below will tell you the same thing without charging for it.
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.

You are reading the United Kingdom figures

The United States splits this work across more than one official group, of which Social and Human Service Assistants 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

In US official statistics this job is counted as Social and Human Service Assistants. Pay and employment stay on this page’s own group; the task list and the scores do not cross over.

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.

In England:
National Careers Service
A free hour with a government-funded careers adviser is worth more than another evening of reading. In England that's the National Careers Service.
Free, government-funded
- Discover your skills and careers (the skills assessment)
In England:
National Careers Service - Find a course
Search what's actually running near you before you spend anything.
Free to search; individual courses vary
In England:
Free courses for jobs (Level 3 qualifications)
A free Level 3 qualification you already qualify for beats a paid course you don't need.
Free for eligible adults
In England:
Skills Bootcamps
Free, up to 16 weeks, and you get a job interview at the end. In England these are Skills Bootcamps - search what's running near you.
Free for eligible adults in England
- Skills Bootcamps - what they are and who can do them (DfE, Skills for Careers)
- Skills Bootcamps - JobHelp (DWP)
In Scotland:
My World of Work (Skills Development Scotland)
In Scotland it's My World of Work, from Skills Development Scotland.
Free, publicly funded
- Skills Development Scotland
In Wales:
Careers Wales
In Wales it's Careers Wales.
Free, Welsh Government-funded
In Northern Ireland:
Careers Service Northern Ireland
In Northern Ireland it's the Careers Service on nidirect.
Free, Department for the Economy-funded

No Space for this job, but one for what is happening to it

Nothing Collab365 runs is built for housing officers, and we are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.

There is one that is not about a job title at all. The AI Authority is about being the person who directs these tools at work rather than the person they get compared to. That is worth saying here, because 29% of the work on this page is already inside what they can do.

Try The AI Authority free →

7 days free, no card needed. Explore up to 2 Spaces before you choose a plan: you pick a plan later, not now.

The AI Authority is a general community about working with AI, not a course for housing officers. You do not need it to act on anything here: the moves above cost nothing and stand on their own. The data on this page is the same either way.

Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for housing officers 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 housing officers 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 housing officers existed, with researched problems, courses and people in the same boat, would you want in?

Your email

We use your email address for one thing: to tell you if a Space for housing officers 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 Housing officers?: Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 41 official task statements scored for Housing officers (United Kingdom, SOC 3223), 29% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 45 out of 100 (range 39–52, band: partial). 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 “Housing officers” can AI already do?: The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Collect data relevant to housing, such as health, employment and demographics” (93/100, very high); “Compile statistical data and generate detailed reports” (93/100, very high); “Identify good practice in housing” (83/100, very high). 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 “Housing officers” stay human?: About 44% 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: “Attend court hearings” (0/100, minimal); “Address problems with squatters in properties” (4/100, minimal); “Implement strategies to reduce anti-social behaviour in communities” (5/100, 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 “Housing officers” do about AI?: Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 29% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 44% 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 Housing officers 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 41 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.
One row is marked low confidence, so treat it as a ballpark rather than a fine measurement.
The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
7 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 job Download this release Look 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 2026-08-05. 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.