Tech That Cares for the Carer: Getting Digital Right in Social Care

Last year, I spent the weekend at the '@Care Innovation Challenge' an NCF initiative that brings together people with fresh ideas to improve social care through technology.

I’ve always been someone who looks at a situation and asks, How can we make this better?  So being around others doing the same was genuinely energising. 'Team Ellyfe’s ' ( which i loved) winningwas a clear highlight.

At the time, I left thinking tech was probably too complex and time-consuming for me. I put an idea I’d been playing with firmly to bed.

But less than a year later, I’m working with business partners, and that same idea is now in development. I’m still in the space, just in a different way than I expected. It has made me think, though…

There is growing interest in how digital tools can improve the way social care is delivered. Many of these developments promise improved efficiency, stronger oversight, and better coordination.

But too often, the perspective of the person delivering the care is missing.

If a system doesn’t work for the care professional on the frontline, especially those working alone in people’s homes—then it isn’t fit for purpose.

Care is highly skilled, person-centred work. It means assessing and responding to changing needs—often in unpredictable, real-time situations. Many care professionals work alone, drawing on their training, experience, and deep knowledge of the individual they support.

As Zoe Elkins, Chief Care Officer at Care Brain, puts it: "If you’re building technology for care, but not building it with carers, you’re doing it wrong. Frontline professionals aren’t just users—they’re the experts."

Technology needs to reflect that. It should be easy to use, support good decision-making, and crucially, not add to the admin burden.

Dr Kirsten Protherough, co-founder of Careboodle, also puts it clearly: “Technology should help us spend more time with the client—not more time on a screen.”

That should be the baseline—not the aspiration.

Many care professionals, especially those with decades of experience—don’t feel confident using digital tools. Some are still getting used to smartphones. Others have had poor experiences with systems that are hard to use, unreliable, or introduced without proper training.

This doesn’t mean they can’t use technology. It means the technology needs to be better suited to the realities of the job. Tools should be intuitive, with clear prompts, and backed by consistent, accessible training.

Importantly, digital systems must support professional judgement—not attempt to replace it. Care professionals should never feel pressured to follow automated advice if they believe it’s not appropriate. These tools are not diagnostics, and we should not allow decisions to be deferred to a system.

Digital tools, when designed well, can contribute to raising the profile of care as a skilled and valued profession.

They can help care professionals evidence their observations, communicate effectively with health colleagues, and act quickly when they notice early signs of concern.

But for that to happen, care workers need access to systems that are relevant to their work, and they need to be involved in shaping how those systems are developed and introduced.

Some tools are already supporting this shift.

CareBrain offers decision support at the point of care, helping staff make sense of what they’re seeing and prompting appropriate actions.

CareBoodle (my baby), helps carers identify signs of delirium and frailty through structured observation, using the PINCH ME framework. It supports communication with health professionals through escalation guidance based on SBAR.

PainChek uses facial recognition technology to help assess pain in people who may not be able to communicate it clearly.

Each of these tools adds to, rather than detracts from, professional practice.

As Thomas Tredinnick from Ally Care (which uses sensors and AI to monitor care home resident ) explains: “Tech should just be a helper—to make sure we have the time and insights to help get residents back to, or stay at, their healthiest, happiest state.”

Time and insight matter. Technology should create space for both, not reduce them.

Even with good tools available, many staff and providers can’t access them.

Internet and phone signal remain unreliable in some areas. Equipment is often outdated or shared. Systems are introduced with little training or follow-up. The people using the tools are rarely involved in choosing them. Many tools are unaffordable for smaller providers or individual carers.

If developers want their tools to be adopted, they need to offer flexible, scalable models that reflect the range of organisations and workers using them.

Care isn’t only delivered by employed staff. Many people working independently—or supporting a family member—face the same decisions and risks, but without the same tools or training.

Any effort to improve care through digital means must include this part of the workforce too. Otherwise, we risk reinforcing unequal access to safe, effective support.

If we want technology to support better care, we need to start by involving the people who provide it. That means: - Designing tools with care professionals, not just for them - Providing equipment and stable connectivity as standard - Offering practical, ongoing training - Pricing tools so they’re usable across the sector, including by individuals - Setting clear boundaries—technology must support judgement, not override it

Digital systems will play a growing role in the future of care. But they need to be grounded in the day-to-day realities of the people who use them.

The test is simple: Does this tool make it easier, safer, or more effective to deliver care? If not, it’s not the right tool—however innovative it claims to be.

Technology should strengthen, not dilute, the skilled, human work at the heart of social care. And to do that, we need to start by listening to the people already doing it.