Will AI replace Welfare professionals n.e.c.?

Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 68 official task statements scored for Welfare professionals n.e.c. (United Kingdom, SOC 2469), 12% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 28 out of 100 (range 22–35, band: low). 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 “Welfare professionals n.e.c.” can AI already do?

The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Keep accurate records of planning meetings” (93/100, very high); “Review laws and regulations relevant to upcoming hearings” (83/100, very high); “Conduct background research to inform discussions and decisions” (75/100, 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 “Welfare professionals n.e.c.” stay human?

About 71% 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: “Provide care and support for children in various institutional settings” (0/100, minimal); “Provide emotional support for patients and their families” (1/100, minimal); “Assess personal characteristics and home conditions of foster home or adoption applicants” (3/100, 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 “Welfare professionals n.e.c.” do about AI?

Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 12% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 71% 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 Welfare professionals n.e.c. 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 68 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

Welfare professionals n.e.c.

placing children in foster or adoptive homes, collaborating with partner agencies to achieve best outcomes and negotiating settlements for specific civil disputes. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

AI changes the edges of this job, not the middle: placing children in foster or adoptive homes is work software can't reach.

Your move: what a welfare professionals n.e.c. can actually do about this ↓

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 12%
changing shape: 17%
staying human: 71%

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

Whole-job exposure score 28 out of 100 (22–35 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, across 68 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 welfare professionals n.e.c. 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.

What shifts is providing information about community health and social resources: the paper around the work, not the work.

Your week, as this page understands it

Job holders in this unit group perform a variety of welfare-related professional occupations not elsewhere classified in minor group 246: Welfare professionals. The job title says “welfare professionals n.e.c.”. The real job is the part underneath: placing children in foster or adoptive homes. 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 welfare professionals n.e.c. is not one task. It is 68 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is placing children in foster or adoptive homes, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 12%
changing shape: 17%
staying human: 71%

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.
17 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

9 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.

Providing information about community health and social resources
This is reading one thing and writing another: information in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 75 · 2469/01, 2469/02
Source: “Provide information about community health and social resources.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 64 out of 100 (60–68 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: Information about local services is published, so pulling together the right options is straightforward for software to produce.
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 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Referring clients to social service or community resources for needs beyond credit or debt counselling
This is reading one thing and writing another: clients in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 70 · 2469/01, 2469/02
Source: “Refer clients to social service or community resources for needs beyond credit or debt counselling.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 64 out of 100 (57–71 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: Matching someone to local services is directory work that software does well, with the worker checking the fit before referring.
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 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Drafting final written agreements for mediation cases
This is reading one thing and writing another: final written agreements in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 2469/03
Source: “Draft final written agreements for mediation cases.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (62–70 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: Turning what was agreed into a clear written agreement is drafting work software does well from the mediator's notes.
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.
Maintaining confidentiality of records relating to clients' treatment
This is reading one thing and writing another: confidentiality of records in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 2469/03
Source: “Maintain confidentiality of records relating to clients' treatment.” (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: Keeping records private is largely about access rules and systems, which are well documented and can be enforced automatically.
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.

Changing shape

13 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.

Writing detailed case reports for legal and social services
The software now makes the first pass at detailed case reports, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 80 · 2469/01, 2469/02
Source: “Write detailed case reports for legal and social services.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 44 out of 100 (37–51 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Case reports can largely be drafted from existing notes, with the formal statutory reports written by registered staff elsewhere.
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 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Collecting supplementary information needed to assist client
The software now makes the first pass at supplementary information, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 70 · 2469/01, 2469/02
Source: “Collect supplementary information needed to assist client, such as employment records, medical records, or school reports.” (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: Requesting and collating records is routine administrative work that software can prepare and track, with the worker sending it on.
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.
Arranging mediation sessions and communicating with clients
The software now makes the first pass at mediation sessions, 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 90 · 2469/03
Source: “Arrange mediation sessions and communicate with clients.” (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: Booking and messaging can be automated, though contact with people in dispute needs care from 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

46 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.

Addressing legal issues, such as child abuse and discipline, to inform custody arrangements
The ratings behind this row put legal issues well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 80 · 2469/01, 2469/02, 2469/03
Source: “Address legal issues, such as child abuse and discipline, to inform custody arrangements.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 37 out of 100 (25–49 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, low confidence.
Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: The law is published and the analysis drafts well, but the arrangements themselves are decided by the court afterwards.
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 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Placing children in foster or adoptive homes
This work happens in the physical world: children, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 95 · 2469/01, 2469/02
Source: “Place children in foster or adoptive homes, institutions, or medical centres.” (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; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Deciding where a child lives is a decision the law reserves to the placing agency, and the move itself happens in person.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Assessing personal characteristics and home conditions of foster home or adoption applicants
This work happens in the physical world: personal characteristics, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 2469/01, 2469/02
Source: “Assess personal characteristics and home conditions of foster home or adoption applicants.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 3 out of 100 (0–10 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: Judging whether a home is suitable means visiting it and meeting the family, and the report must satisfy fostering rules.
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 1/4.

Show the other 58 tasks

Keeping accurate records of planning meetings
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: accurate records of planning meetings in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 70 · 2469/03
Source: “Keep accurate records of planning meetings.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 93 out of 100 (86–100 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: Keeping meeting records is note-taking and filing that software now does at least as well as a person.
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.
Reviewing laws and regulations relevant to upcoming hearings
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: laws in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 70 · 2469/03
Source: “Review laws and regulations relevant to upcoming hearings.” (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: Legislation and guidance are published in full and searchable, so preparing this kind of review is a strong fit for software.
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.
Conducting background research to inform discussions and decisions
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: background research in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 70 · 2469/03
Source: “Conduct background research to inform discussions and 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: Gathering and summarising background material from available sources is one of the strongest uses of current software.
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.
Analysing laws, regulations and policies to prepare for hearings and determine conclusions
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: laws, regulations and policies in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 75 · 2469/03
Source: “Analyse laws, regulations, and policies to prepare for hearings and determine conclusions.” (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: Legislation and policy are published in full, so preparing the analysis for a hearing is the kind of research software does 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.
Recording accurate and impartial session notes for clients to review remaining issues and outcomes
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: accurate in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 75 · 2469/03
Source: “Record accurate and impartial session notes for clients to review remaining issues and outcomes.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (62–70 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 accurate, neutral notes of what was discussed is summarising 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 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Collecting data to inform continuous improvement activities
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at data, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 70 · 2469/02
Source: “Collect data to inform continuous improvement activities.” (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: Pulling together data for improvement work is collation software already does well, though some gathering 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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Obtaining written agreement from participants confirming their willingness to engage in the sessions
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at written agreement, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 85 · 2469/03
Source: “Obtain written agreement from participants confirming their willingness to engage in the sessions.” (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: Preparing and issuing the consent paperwork is routine document work, even though the parties still have to say yes.
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.
Promoting the organisation's ethos and aims
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at the organisation's ethos, 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 · 2469/02
Source: “Promote the organisation's ethos and aims, focusing on diversity, inclusion, and equality.” (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: Messages are easy to write, but people take an organisation’s values from the colleagues around them.
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.
Explaining the mediation process to all participants
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at the mediation process, 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 85 · 2469/03
Source: “Explain the mediation process to all participants.” (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: Explaining how mediation works follows a well-known script, though people take it better from a person they have just met.
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.
Conducting initial meetings to determine details
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at initial meetings, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 75 · 2469/03
Source: “Conduct initial meetings to determine details, such as witness numbers or time requirements.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 49 out of 100 (42–56 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Agreeing practical details like timings and numbers is straightforward organising work that software can prepare in advance.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Administering welfare state benefits
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at welfare state benefits, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 70 · 2469/02
Source: “Administer welfare state benefits.” (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; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Benefit rules are written down and largely automated already, though the formal award decision is made under an officer's delegated authority.
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 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Provide individuals with information and choices regarding their care and support
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at individuals, 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 · 2469/02
Source: “Provide individuals with information and choices regarding their care and support.” (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: Options and entitlements are documented and can be set out clearly, though talking someone through their choices still needs a person.
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.
Preparing written opinions or decisions regarding cases
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at written opinions, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 70 · 2469/03
Source: “Prepare written opinions or decisions regarding cases.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 44 out of 100 (37–51 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: A structured written decision can largely be drafted from the case papers, though the reasoning still needs a person to own it.
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 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Setting clear and measurable objectives for the team
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at clear, 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 · 2469/02
Source: “Set clear and measurable objectives for the team.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 40 out of 100 (33–47 allowing for uncertainty): partial 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: Objectives can be drafted, but agreeing them with a team is a management conversation.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · 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.
Conducting initial meetings to settle procedural matters
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at initial meetings, 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 · 2469/03
Source: “Conduct initial meetings to settle procedural matters, such as fees.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 40 out of 100 (33–47 allowing for uncertainty): partial 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: Setting out fees and procedure is largely standard information, though it is normally covered in a first meeting.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · 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.
Coordinating with welfare services for student support
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles welfare services and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 70 · 2469/02
Source: “Coordinate with welfare services for student support.” (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: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Referrals and scheduling can be handled digitally, but joining services up around a student takes chasing people directly.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · 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 2/4.
Liaising with local authorities and healthcare services for student support
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles local authorities and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 70 · 2469/02
Source: “Liaise with local authorities and healthcare services for student support.” (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: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Referrals and correspondence can be prepared automatically, but getting services to act usually means someone chasing them personally.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · 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 2/4.
Clarifying the terms of agreements to all parties
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles the terms of agreements and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 80 · 2469/03
Source: “Clarify the terms of agreements to all parties involved.” (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: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Plain-English explanations of agreed terms can be drafted automatically, but parties usually want them talked through by the mediator.
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 3/4.
Arranging for mental health or substance misuse treatment
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles mental health and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 70 · 2469/01, 2469/02
Source: “Arrange for mental health or substance misuse treatment as required.” (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: Finding services and making referrals is well-documented work, and the treatment decision itself is taken by clinical services.
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.
Practising within the profession's legal and ethical boundaries
staying human
The ratings behind this row put within the profession's legal well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 80 · 2469/03
Source: “Practise within the profession's legal and ethical boundaries.” (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 rating behind it: Codes and rules are published and easy to check against, but behaving within them is something the worker does themselves.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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.
Counseling individuals, groups, families or communities regarding issues, mental health, poverty, unemployment, substance abuse, physical abuse, rehabilitation, social adjustment, child care or medical care
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles individuals, groups, families or communities regarding issues and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 70 · 2469/01, 2469/02
Source: “Counsel individuals, groups, families, or communities regarding issues including mental health, poverty, unemployment, substance abuse, physical abuse, rehabilitation, social adjustment, child care, or medical care.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 28 out of 100 (21–35 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: General guidance on these problems is well documented, but counselling works through a trusting relationship with the particular person or family.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Advising students with adjustment or academic problems
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles students and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 75 · 2469/02
Source: “Advise students with adjustment or academic problems.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 28 out of 100 (24–32 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Helping a struggling pupil turns on a trusted relationship built up face to face over time.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Identifying and managing risks associated with the work
staying human
The ratings behind this row put risks well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 70 · 2469/02
Source: “Identify and manage risks associated with the work.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 28 out of 100 (21–35 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Risk checklists are standard and easy to apply, but spotting real risks depends on what the worker sees on the ground.
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 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Discussing financial situations and planning with clients
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles financial situations and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 70 · 2469/03
Source: “Discuss financial situations and planning with clients.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 28 out of 100 (21–35 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: Budgeting information is easy to produce, but people only talk openly about money troubles with someone they trust.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Following through to ensure the efficacy of services
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles to ensure the efficacy of services and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 75 · 2469/01, 2469/02
Source: “Follow through to ensure the efficacy of services provided.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 26 out of 100 (19–33 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: Checking that services were delivered can be tracked automatically, but judging whether they helped means going back to the person.
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 2/4.
Continuouslying develop professional skills and knowledge through ongoing professional development activities
staying human
The ratings behind this row put develop professional skills well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 75 · 2469/02
Source: “Continuously develop professional skills and knowledge through ongoing professional development activities.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 26 out of 100 (19–33 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over.
The rating behind it: Keeping your own skills current is something only you can do; tools can supply the reading, not the learning.
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 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Consulting with the team supporting the client to plan for ongoing services
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles the team supporting the client and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 75 · 2469/01, 2469/02
Source: “Consult with the team supporting the client to plan for ongoing services.” (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 value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Notes and draft plans can be prepared, but agreeing next steps happens in a discussion between the people involved.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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 2/4.
Advising foster or adoptive parents on child care and integration strategies
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles foster and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 85 · 2469/01, 2469/02
Source: “Advise foster or adoptive parents on child care and integration strategies.” (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: Guidance is well documented, but it lands through a trusted relationship with the family, usually built face to face in their home.
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.
Leading changes in working practices to achieve improved outcomes
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles changes and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 75 · 2469/02
Source: “Lead changes in working practices to achieve improved outcomes.” (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: AI can set out a better way of working, though persuading a team to change it depends on the manager.
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.
Consulting with clients to understand their specific needs and preferences
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: clients, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 2469/03
Source: “Consult with clients to understand their specific needs and preferences.” (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: Questions can be scripted, but customers explain what they want in conversation with a 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.
Accepting clients' issues without bias to ensure fair treatment
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles clients' issues without bias and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 85 · 2469/03
Source: “Accept clients' issues without bias to ensure fair treatment.” (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: Treating people even-handedly is about how the worker behaves towards them, which is not an output software can produce.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Deciding when to assess mediation effectiveness and communicate the process to involved parties
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles this work and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 80 · 2469/03
Source: “Decide when to assess mediation effectiveness and communicate the process to involved parties.” (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: Judging when mediation is working depends on live signals in the room that only the person present picks up.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Organising public presentations about mediation for organisations
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: public presentations, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 2469/03
Source: “Organise public presentations about mediation for organisations.” (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: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Materials can be prepared automatically, but a public talk is delivered by someone standing in front of the room.
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 2/4.
Collaborating with partner agencies to achieve best outcomes
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles partner agencies and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 80 · 2469/02
Source: “Collaborate with partner agencies to achieve best outcomes.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 17 out of 100 (10–24 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: Joint working with partner agencies runs on established professional relationships rather than documents.
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 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Developing and delivering high-quality supervision practices and decision-making
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles high-quality supervision practices and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 75 · 2469/02
Source: “Develop and deliver high-quality supervision practices and decision-making.” (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 value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Supervision frameworks can be written down, but good supervision happens through regular personal conversations about real cases.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Negotiating settlements for specific civil disputes
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles settlements and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 80 · 2469/03
Source: “Negotiate settlements for specific civil disputes.” (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 value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Settlement options can be analysed, but agreement comes from live negotiation where both sides read and trust the person present.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Assisting parents in addressing their children's developmental needs
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: parents, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 2469/01, 2469/02
Source: “Assist parents in addressing their children's developmental needs.” (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: Developmental guidance is well documented, but this help is given by working alongside parents and children in their own home.
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.
Identifying and assessing signs of ineffective mediation
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles signs of ineffective mediation and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 75 · 2469/03
Source: “Identify and assess signs of ineffective mediation.” (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: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Spotting that mediation is going nowhere relies on tone, body language and silences in the room.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Buildsing relationships with partner organizations and stakeholders
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles relationships and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 75 · 2469/02
Source: “Builds relationships with partner organizations and stakeholders, sharing and agreeing on goals and outcomes.” (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: Partnerships are built through people who know and trust each other over time.
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.
Encouraging participation of children, young people and families in service improvement
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles participation of children, young people and families and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 75 · 2469/02
Source: “Encourage participation of children, young people, and families in service improvement.” (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: Getting families involved in improving a service depends on personal encouragement and trust.
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.
Supervising support workers
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles support workers and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 75 · 2469/02
Source: “Supervise support workers.” (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: Rotas and notes can be automated, but supervising staff is a personal relationship built through regular one-to-one contact.
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.
Ensuring equal opportunity for all participants to take part in the mediation process
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles equal opportunity and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 90 · 2469/03
Source: “Ensure equal opportunity for all participants to take part in the mediation process.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 12 out of 100 (5–19 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: Making sure everyone gets a fair hearing depends on reading the room live and on the mediator's standing with the parties.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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.
Assessesing and managesing safeguarding risks
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles risks and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 90 · 2469/02
Source: “Assesses and manages safeguarding risks for children, young people, and vulnerable adults, working collaboratively with other professionals and agencies.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 11 out of 100 (4–18 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: Safeguarding thresholds are published, but weighing risk for a particular child relies on private information and gets referred on for statutory decisions.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Assisting in community development by supporting local projects and initiatives
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: community development, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 2469/02
Source: “Assist in community development by supporting local projects and initiatives.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 11 out of 100 (4–18 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 local projects means turning up and getting involved with the people running them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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 2/4.
Modelsing a professional approach to decision-making
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles a professional approach and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 75 · 2469/02
Source: “Models a professional approach to decision-making, challenging and offering alternative perspectives when necessary.” (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 value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Setting an example in how decisions are made only works because colleagues watch a real person do 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 1/4.
Determining causes of truancy and misbehaviour in consultation with parents
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles causes of truancy and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 70 · 2469/02
Source: “Determine causes of truancy and misbehaviour in consultation with parents, teachers, and school staff.” (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 value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: The reasons sit in private family and school circumstances, and only come out through conversations with people who will confide.
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 1/4.
Clarifying issues, identify underlying concerns and understand needs and interests by conferring with disputants
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles issues, identify underlying concerns and understand needs and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 85 · 2469/03
Source: “Clarify issues, identify underlying concerns, and understand needs and interests by conferring with disputants.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 10 out of 100 (6–14 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Drawing out what people in dispute really want depends on them trusting the person asking.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 4/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Guiding parties towards mutual agreement by enhancing understanding of different perspectives
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles parties towards mutual agreement and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 80 · 2469/03
Source: “Guide parties towards mutual agreement by enhancing understanding of different perspectives.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 10 out of 100 (6–14 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Helping people in dispute understand each other depends on a trusted person in the room with them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 4/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Supporting clients in developing their parenting skills
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: clients, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 2469/01, 2469/02
Source: “Support clients in developing their parenting skills.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (2–16 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: Parenting guidance is widely published, but this work is done by showing and encouraging in the family home, week after week.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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.
Promoting and demonstrating understanding of diversity and equality to support all children
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: diversity, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 2469/02
Source: “Promote and demonstrate understanding of diversity and equality to support all children, including those with additional needs.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (2–16 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: Policies and training material are easy to write, but showing fair treatment day to day happens in person with the children themselves.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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.
Mediating disputes to achieve resolution through dialogue
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles disputes and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 90 · 2469/03
Source: “Mediate disputes to achieve resolution through dialogue.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (5–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Reaching agreement depends on people trusting the mediator in the room, which is the whole point of the job.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 4/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Developsing and implementsing evidence-based interventions to address the complex needs of children
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: evidence-based interventions, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 2469/02
Source: “Develops and implements evidence-based interventions to address the complex needs of children, young people, and families.” (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: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: The evidence base is published and plans draft well, but delivering the work happens in person with families over time.
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 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Interviewing the child and family to determine if further action
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: the child, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 2469/01, 2469/02
Source: “Interview the child and family to determine if further action is required.” (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: Talking with a child and family needs a person in the room they will open up to; findings then go to a registered social worker.
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 3/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Interviewing clients individually, in families or in groups, assessing their situations, capabilities and problems to determine what services are required to meet their needs
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: clients, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 2469/01, 2469/02
Source: “Interview clients individually, in families, or in groups, assessing their situations, capabilities, and problems to determine what services are required to meet their needs.” (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: The conversation must happen with someone the client will talk to, usually face to face, and the resulting plan is approved elsewhere.
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 3/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Communicatesing effectively with children, young people and families, actively listening to their needs and concerns
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: children, young people and families, actively, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 2469/02
Source: “Communicates effectively with children, young people, and families, actively listening to their needs and concerns.” (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: Really listening to a child or family is the work itself, and it happens face to face between people.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 4/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Assisting with hearings and providing testimony to inform custody arrangements
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: hearings, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 2469/01, 2469/02
Source: “Assist with hearings and provide testimony to inform custody arrangements.” (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: Written statements can be drafted, but only the person who did the work can be sworn in and answer questions at the hearing.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Providing emotional support for patients and their families
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: emotional support, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 2469/02
Source: “Provide emotional support for patients and their families.” (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: Comfort at a difficult time works because another human being is present and means it.
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.
Providing care and supporting for children in various institutional settings
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: care, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 2469/01, 2469/02
Source: “Provide care and support for children in various institutional settings.” (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: Looking after children in a residential setting is hands-on work that has to be done in person.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 4/4 · how much data exists 1/4.

What this job pays, and how many people do it

Median pay: £40,600a 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: 23,000in 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: detailed case reports in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: providing information about community health and social resources and referring clients to social service or community resources for needs beyond credit or debt counselling. What it cannot do is be answerable: children needs a named person the rules will accept, and software cannot be that person. 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: placing children in foster or adoptive homes is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.

So, given all that: 12% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 17% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 71% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 68 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. Providing information about community health and social resources 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 detailed case reports, 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 legal issues 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 writing detailed case reports for legal and social services. 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, 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 welfare professionals n.e.c. (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was child and early years officers: only about 15% of its durable work is work you already do and it pays 23.6% less. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 28/100 here, with only 12% of the task list in the top band, and “place children in foster or adoptive homes, institutions, or medical centres” is not work that hands over cleanly. None of them beats deepening what you already have.

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.

Child and early years officers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “place children in foster or adoptive homes, institutions, or medical centres”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 15% 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 15% of the durable work in that job is work you do today, and the rest you would be learning while the bills carried on. It is a pay cut, in those words: £31,001 against your £40,594, 23.6% less (ASHE Table 14.7a, 2025 provisional (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Youth and community workers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “assesses and manages safeguarding risks for children, young people, and vulnerable adults, working collaboratively with other…”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 11% 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 11% of the durable work in that job is work you do today, and the rest you would be learning while the bills carried on. It is a pay cut, in those words: £32,654 against your £40,594, 19.6% less (ASHE Table 14.7a, 2025 provisional (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Social workers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “place children in foster or adoptive homes, institutions, or medical centres”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 11% 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 11% 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: 12% of its task weight, across 68 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 placing children in foster or adoptive homes 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.

You are reading the United Kingdom figures

The United States splits this work across more than one official group, of which Marriage and Family Therapists 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 Marriage and Family Therapists, Rehabilitation Counselors, Substance Abuse, Behavioral Disorder, and Mental Health Counselors, Counselors, All Other, Child, Family, and School Social Workers, Healthcare Social Workers, Mental Health and Substance Abuse Social Workers, Social Workers, All Other, Probation Officers and Correctional Treatment Specialists and Community and Social Service Specialists, All Other. 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.

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 welfare professionals n.e.c., 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 12% 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 welfare professionals n.e.c.. 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 welfare professionals n.e.c. 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 welfare professionals n.e.c. 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 welfare professionals n.e.c. 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 welfare professionals n.e.c. 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 Welfare professionals n.e.c.?: Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 68 official task statements scored for Welfare professionals n.e.c. (United Kingdom, SOC 2469), 12% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 28 out of 100 (range 22–35, band: low). 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 “Welfare professionals n.e.c.” can AI already do?: The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Keep accurate records of planning meetings” (93/100, very high); “Review laws and regulations relevant to upcoming hearings” (83/100, very high); “Conduct background research to inform discussions and decisions” (75/100, 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 “Welfare professionals n.e.c.” stay human?: About 71% 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: “Provide care and support for children in various institutional settings” (0/100, minimal); “Provide emotional support for patients and their families” (1/100, minimal); “Assess personal characteristics and home conditions of foster home or adoption applicants” (3/100, 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 “Welfare professionals n.e.c.” do about AI?: Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 12% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 71% 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 Welfare professionals n.e.c. 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 68 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.
17 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.