Futureproof
Menu

US dataswitch to UK

Residential Advisors

communicating with other staff to resolve problems with individual students, developing program plans for individuals or assisting in plan development and overseeing departmental budget. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

AI changes the edges of this job, not the middle: observing students to detect and report unusual behavior is work software can't reach.

Your move: what you can actually do about this ↓

What shifts is ordering supplies for facilities: the overhead at the edges, not the middle you trained for.

Your week, as this page understands it

Coordinate activities in resident facilities in secondary school and college dormitories, group homes, or similar establishments. Order supplies and determine need for maintenance, repairs, and furnishings. May maintain household records and assign rooms. May assist residents with problem solving or refer them to counseling resources. The job title says “residential advisors”. The real job is the part underneath: observing students to detect and report unusual behavior. 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 residential advisors is not one task. It is 30 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is observing students to detect and report unusual behavior, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI
12%
changing shape
13%
staying human
76%

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

Whole-job exposure score 23 out of 100 (19–29 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, across 30 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 residential advisors 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.

Your job, task by task

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

Shifting to AI

4 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.

  • Ordering supplies for facilities

    This is reading one thing and writing another: supplies in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 3 · Core
    Source: “Order supplies for facilities.” (O*NET 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: Ordering supplies is routine purchasing paperwork software handles easily.

    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.

  • Compiling information, residents' daily activities and the quantities of supplies used to prepare required reports

    This is reading one thing and writing another: information, residents' daily activities and the quantities in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Compile information such as residents' daily activities and the quantities of supplies used to prepare required reports.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 69 out of 100 (62–76 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: Compiling activity and supply information into required reports is routine collation software does quickly.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · 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.

  • Overseeing departmental budget

    This is reading one thing and writing another: departmental budget in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source: “Oversee departmental budget.” (O*NET 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: Budget oversight is spreadsheet and records work that software handles 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.

  • Assigning rooms to students

    This is reading one thing and writing another: rooms in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source: “Assign rooms to students.” (O*NET 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: Assigning rooms is an allocation task software does well, though roommate matching still benefits from human judgment.

    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

4 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.

  • Answering telephones and routing calls or delivering messages

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

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Answer telephones, and route calls or deliver messages.” (O*NET 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: Answering calls and routing messages is largely handled by phone systems and software already.

    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.

  • Providing requested information on students' progress and the development of case plans

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

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Provide requested information on students' progress and the development of case plans.” (O*NET 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 progress information and case plan updates is record-keeping and writing 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 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Developing and coordinating educational programs for residents

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

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Develop and coordinate educational programs for residents.” (O*NET 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: Educational programs for residents can largely be designed and written at a screen from documented material.

    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.

Staying human

22 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.

  • Communicating with other staff to resolve problems with individual students

    The value here is that a specific person handles other staff and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Communicate with other staff to resolve problems with individual students.” (O*NET 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: Sorting out a student problem with colleagues depends on shared knowledge of that person and ongoing working relationships.

    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.

  • Observing students to detect and report unusual behavior

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

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Observe students to detect and report unusual behavior.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

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

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

    The rating behind it: Noticing that a student is behaving unusually requires being around them day to day.

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

  • Mediating interpersonal problems between residents

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

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Mediate interpersonal problems between residents.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 5 out of 100 (1–9 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: Sorting out a dispute between residents depends on both sides trusting the person in the middle.

    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.

Show the other 20 tasks

  • Processing contract cancellations for students who are unable to follow residence hall policies and procedures

    changing shape

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

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source: “Process contract cancellations for students who are unable to follow residence hall policies and procedures.” (O*NET 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: Processing a contract cancellation is standard paperwork against policy, which software drafts 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 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Collaborating with counselors to develop counseling programs that address the needs of individual students

    staying human

    The value here is that a specific person handles counselors and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Collaborate with counselors to develop counseling programs that address the needs of individual students.” (O*NET 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: Software can draft program content, but designing support around a specific student involves counselors who know them.

    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.

  • Developing program plans for individuals or assisting in plan development

    staying human

    The value here is that a specific person handles program plans and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Develop program plans for individuals or assist in plan development.” (O*NET 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: Plans can be drafted from records, but they depend on knowing the individual student well.

    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.

  • Determining the need for facility maintenance and repair and notifying appropriate personnel

    staying human

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

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Determine the need for facility maintenance and repair, and notify appropriate personnel.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 29 out of 100 (22–36 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.

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

    The rating behind it: Spotting what needs fixing means seeing the building, though logging and reporting the fault is quick computer work.

    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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Counseling students in the handling of issues

    staying human

    The value here is that a specific person handles students and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Counsel students in the handling of issues such as family, financial, and educational problems.” (O*NET 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: Software can offer general guidance on family or money worries, but students open up to someone they trust in person.

    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.

  • Administering, coordinating or recommending disciplinary and corrective actions

    staying human

    The value here is that a specific person handles disciplinary and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Administer, coordinate, or recommend disciplinary and corrective actions.” (O*NET 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: Discipline decisions can be drafted against policy, but delivering them to a student is done face to face.

    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.

  • Supervising, training and evaluating residence hall staff, including resident assistants

    staying human

    The value here is that a specific person handles residence hall staff, including resident assistants and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Supervise, train, and evaluate residence hall staff, including resident assistants, participants in work-study programs, and other student workers.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (17–25 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: Supervising and evaluating resident assistants depends on knowing them and being present in the hall.

    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.

  • Conferring with medical personnel to better understand the backgrounds and needs of individual residents

    staying human

    The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for medical personnel, and that person cannot be a piece of software.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Confer with medical personnel to better understand the backgrounds and needs of individual residents.” (O*NET 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: someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Understanding a resident medical background means a conversation between professionals about a specific person.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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.

  • Enforcing rules and regulations to ensure the smooth and orderly operation of dormitory programs

    staying human

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

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Enforce rules and regulations to ensure the smooth and orderly operation of dormitory programs.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

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

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

    The rating behind it: Enforcing hall rules means being present when things happen and dealing with residents face to face.

    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.

  • Supervising the activities of housekeeping personnel

    staying human

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

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source: “Supervise the activities of housekeeping personnel.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

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

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

    The rating behind it: Supervising housekeeping staff means being in the building watching the work get done.

    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.

  • Holding regular meetings with each assigned unit

    staying human

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

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Hold regular meetings with each assigned unit.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 4 out of 100 (0–14 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence, and it moved between repeat runs, so the range is widened.

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

    The rating behind it: Regular unit meetings are about being in the room with residents who live there.

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

  • Providing emergency first aid and summon medical assistance

    staying human

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

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Provide emergency first aid and summon medical assistance when necessary.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

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

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

    The rating behind it: First aid means physically helping an injured person straight away.

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

  • Make regular rounds to ensure that residents and areas are safe and secure

    staying human

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

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Make regular rounds to ensure that residents and areas are safe and secure.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

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

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

    The rating behind it: Walking rounds to check that people and buildings are safe requires being there.

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

  • Directing and participating in on- and off-campus recreational activities for residents of institutions

    staying human

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

    importance 3 · Supplemental
    Source: “Direct and participate in on- and off-campus recreational activities for residents of institutions, boarding schools, fraternities or sororities, children's homes, or similar establishments.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

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

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

    The rating behind it: Running recreational activities means being there taking part with residents.

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

  • Sorting and distributing mail

    staying human

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

    importance 3 · Supplemental
    Source: “Sort and distribute mail.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

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

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

    The rating behind it: Sorting and handing out mail is physical work with real envelopes.

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

  • Supervising students' housekeeping work to ensure that it is done properly

    staying human

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

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source: “Supervise students' housekeeping work to ensure that it is done properly.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

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

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

    The rating behind it: Checking that students have cleaned properly means looking at the rooms.

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

  • Chaperoning group-sponsored trips and social functions

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: group-sponsored trips, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 3 · Core
    Source: “Chaperone group-sponsored trips and social functions.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

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

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

    The rating behind it: Chaperoning trips and social functions means physically going along.

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

  • Accompanying and supervising students during meals

    staying human

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

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source: “Accompany and supervise students during meals.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

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

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

    The rating behind it: Supervising students at meals means being in the dining hall.

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

  • Providing transportation or escorting

    staying human

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

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source: “Provide transportation or escort for expeditions, such as shopping trips or visits to doctors or dentists.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

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

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

    The rating behind it: Driving or escorting students to appointments and shops requires a person physically going.

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

  • Inventorying, packing and removing items left behind by former residents

    staying human

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

    importance 3 · Supplemental
    Source: “Inventory, pack, and remove items left behind by former residents.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

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

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

    The rating behind it: Packing and removing belongings left behind is manual work.

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

What this job pays, and how many people do it

Median pay
$42,240a year, the middle of the range, so half earn more and half earn less.bls-oews, 2025 · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
How we know this

Source: bls-oews

Reference period: May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)

Rounding: Shown as published.

People doing this job
84,760in the US, 2025.bls-oews · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)

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: information, residents' daily activities and the quantities in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: ordering supplies for facilities and compiling information. What it cannot do is be there in the room, and that is still where students get done. Which is why this page talks about your tasks changing, not your job ending.

Your move

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

Start with what does not change: observing students to detect and report unusual behavior 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, 13% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 76% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 30 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. Ordering supplies for facilities 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 information, residents' daily activities and the quantities, 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 other staff is in scope or not. Nothing to log into, no license 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 answering telephones and routing calls or delivering messages. 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, use CareerOneStop - Find local training. It is free, it is the Labor Department's own service, 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 US occupations to residential advisors (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was recreation workers: only about 6% of its durable work is work you already do and it pays 13.4% less. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 23/100 here, with only 12% of the task list in the top band, and “communicate with other staff to resolve problems with individual students” 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 830 US 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.

  • Recreation Workers

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already provide emergency first aid and summon medical assistance when necessary, and their equivalent is to administer first aid according to prescribed procedures and notify emergency medical personnel when…. Across both published task lists that is about 6% of the durable work in that job.

    Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 6% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: $36,560 against your $42,240, 13.4% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.

    Look at that job’s page anyway →

  • Self-Enrichment Teachers

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already enforce rules and regulations to ensure the smooth and orderly operation of dormitory…, and their equivalent is to enforce policies and rules governing students. Across both published task lists that is about 2% of the durable work in that job.

    Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 2% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.

    Look at that job’s page anyway →

  • Middle School Teachers, Except Special and Career/Technical Education

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already observe students to detect and report unusual behavior, and their equivalent is to observe and evaluate students' performance, behavior, social development, and physical health. Across both published task lists that is about 1% of the durable work in that job.

    Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 1% 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: 12% of its task weight, across 30 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 observing students to detect and report unusual behavior 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 States figures

The United Kingdom splits this work across more than one official group, of which Sports and leisure assistants is the closest. The pay and employment figures are not directly comparable, and we do not average them together.

Switch to the United Kingdom page →partial match

In UK official statistics this job is counted as Sports and leisure 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.

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

Nothing Collab365 runs is built for residential advisors, 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 residential advisors. 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 residential advisors 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 residential advisors 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 residential advisors existed, with researched problems, courses and people in the same boat, would you want in?

We use your email address for one thing: to tell you if a Space for residential advisors 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 Residential Advisors?
Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 30 official task statements scored for Residential Advisors (United States, SOC 39-9041), 12% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 23 out of 100 (range 19–29, 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 “Residential Advisors” can AI already do?
The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Assign rooms to students” (75/100, high); “Order supplies for facilities” (75/100, high); “Oversee departmental budget” (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 “Residential Advisors” stay human?
About 76% 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: “Inventory, pack, and remove items left behind by former residents” (0/100, minimal); “Provide transportation or escort for expeditions, such as shopping trips or visits to doctors or dentists” (0/100, minimal); “Accompany and supervise students during meals” (0/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.
What should someone working in “Residential Advisors” do about AI?
Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 12% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 76% 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 Residential Advisors 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 30 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

  • One task scored differently between repeat runs, so its range on this page is wider. We would rather show the wobble than hide it.
  • The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
  • 2 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
onet-dbProcessing: catalogue-bridge → onet-im-rt-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
Task weights
onet-db (im-rt)
Scores
Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-04.
Pay and employment
bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))

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

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

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

How we score a jobDownload this releaseLook up another job

Using these figures?

Cite this

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

Plain text

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

BibTeX

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

Permalink

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

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