Digital maturity in children’s social care is about much more than replacing paper with software. It describes how well an organisation combines technology, data quality, governance, staff skills and service design to support better decisions and outcomes.
In July 2026, the Department for Education published Data and digital maturity in children’s social care, based on responses from 110 English local authorities. Although the survey focused on local authorities rather than individual care providers, the findings reveal wider sector challenges that are highly relevant to Supported Accommodation and Residential Children’s Homes.
The research found a striking mix of modern tools and manual processes: 96% used Power BI for reporting, dashboards or analysis, yet 71% still received safeguarding data from external partners by email attachment. Meanwhile, 79% were already using AI, but only 4% had a children’s-services-specific AI strategy.
What is digital maturity in children’s social care?
Short answer: digital maturity is an organisation’s ability to use data, technology, people and processes together effectively. A digitally mature service does not simply own software. It can capture reliable information, make it accessible to authorised users, use it to understand performance and improve services over time.
The DfE research examined maturity across five connected areas rather than treating technology as a standalone purchase.
The five pillars of digital maturity
The study assessed five pillars:
- Strategy and governance — how digital and data priorities are led and governed.
- Data management and quality — whether data is accurate, consistent and useful.
- Technology and infrastructure — whether systems and tools are suitable and reliable.
- People, skills and culture — whether staff have the confidence, skills and support to use technology well.
- Service design and use of data, digital and technology — whether digital tools actually improve how services are delivered.
This framework is useful for care providers too. Buying a case-management platform may improve technology infrastructure, but digital maturity will remain weak if staff still duplicate records, managers do not use reporting, or processes are unclear.
71% still receive safeguarding data by email attachment
One of the clearest findings was the continued reliance on manual information transfer. Of the authorities surveyed:
- 71% used email attachments to receive safeguarding data from external partners;
- 46% used file transfers;
- only 25% used automated or API-based methods.
The report notes that heavy reliance on email can create avoidable inefficiencies, delays and risk.
For Supported Accommodation and Children’s Homes, the lesson is not that email is automatically inappropriate. It is that important records should not become fragmented across inboxes, attachments, local folders and separate spreadsheets. Teams need a clear source of truth for operational and safeguarding records.
This becomes even more important as the new Information Sharing Duty 2026 takes effect.
Dashboards are becoming normal: 96% use Power BI
The DfE survey found that 96% of authorities used Power BI for reporting, dashboards or analysis, while 78% used Excel. This shows how normal visual reporting and data analysis have become within children’s social care.
For care providers, the most useful question is not “Do we have a dashboard?” but:
Can our records tell us something useful?
Managers should be able to use recorded information to identify patterns such as:
- recurring incidents;
- safeguarding themes;
- missing or overdue actions;
- changes in a young person’s support needs;
- service activity over time;
- areas requiring management attention.
A system that stores information but cannot help managers understand it may be digital, but it is not necessarily mature.
Why incompatible systems are a major barrier
The research found that 62% of authorities identified incompatible systems as a barrier to external data sharing, while 51% identified the same problem internally.
This is a familiar operational problem: several digital tools can still create a fragmented service if information has to be copied manually between them.
The result can be:
- duplicate data entry;
- inconsistent records;
- longer administrative processes;
- missing context;
- different versions of the same information;
- more time spent searching and reconciling records.
For a provider, digital maturity means reducing unnecessary duplication and defining where the authoritative record lives.
AI adoption is high, but governance is catching up
The study found that 79% of responding authorities were already using AI for some work, tasks or processes. However, only 4% had a children’s-services-specific AI strategy.
This gap matters. AI can potentially help with administrative work, summarisation, analysis and planning, but children’s social care involves sensitive personal information and high-stakes professional judgement.
Providers considering AI should be clear about:
- what information staff are allowed to enter into AI tools;
- whether the tool has been approved;
- how personal data is protected;
- how AI-generated content is checked;
- which decisions must remain human-led;
- how use is documented and governed.
AI should support professional practice, not blur responsibility for it.
Digital maturity has a people dimension too
The technology can be ready while the team is not. In the DfE survey, 36% of respondents rated their people, skills and culture as “developing” in the self-assessment.
That is a valuable reminder for providers implementing new systems. Adoption is more likely to succeed when:
- staff understand why the system is being introduced;
- workflows are simpler than the old process;
- training is practical and role-specific;
- managers model consistent use;
- feedback is collected and acted on;
- duplicate legacy processes are removed where appropriate.
If a digital system feels like extra administration layered on top of old paperwork, staff may naturally resist it.
Access to records is still developing
The research also found that technology-enabled access was uneven. Among responding authorities, 49% allowed approved local partners to view care records, 38% allowed approved partners to contribute to records, 18% allowed children and young people to contribute to their own records, and 20% reported none of the listed access capabilities.
The ICO data-sharing guidance is a useful reference when designing access and sharing processes around personal information.
For regulated care services, this reinforces the importance of role-based access. The goal is not to give everyone access to everything. It is to make sure the right person can access the right information for the right purpose.
What does digital maturity mean for Supported Accommodation and Children’s Homes?
A provider does not need the technology estate of a local authority to become more digitally mature. Start with the operational basics.
1. Create one clear source of truth
Daily logs, safeguarding records, incidents, forms and management actions should not be scattered across unrelated tools without a clear structure.
2. Improve data quality
A digital record can still be a bad record. Use consistent forms, required fields where appropriate, timestamps and clear authorship.
3. Make management information useful
Do not collect data simply because the system allows it. Decide what managers genuinely need to understand and review.
4. Reduce retrospective re-entry
Where possible, staff should record information close to the point of activity rather than writing notes elsewhere and retyping them later.
5. Build permissions around roles
Frontline staff, managers and administrators may need different levels of access and different views.
6. Connect incidents to follow-up
A record should not stop at the initial event. Our Ofsted Serious Incident Notifications guide explains why follow-up, review and learning matter.
Digital maturity checklist for care providers
Ask your team:
- Can staff record important information without duplicating it elsewhere?
- Can managers find a record from six months ago quickly?
- Are safeguarding concerns linked to actions and outcomes?
- Can managers see overdue follow-up?
- Are permissions based on role?
- Can the service identify trends across incidents and safeguarding?
- Are staff still relying heavily on personal notebooks, email or disconnected spreadsheets?
- Is there a clear process for correcting inaccurate records?
- Do staff understand which system is the authoritative record?
- Does technology reduce administrative friction rather than add to it?
CareSync is designed for Supported Accommodation and Residential Children’s Homes, bringing care records, incidents, safeguarding, forms and management information into a connected digital workflow.
Related CareSync guides
- Supported Accommodation Record Keeping: 2026 Essential Guide
- Information Sharing Duty 2026: Safeguarding Guide
- Ofsted Serious Incident Notifications: 2026 Guide
- Children’s Home Records: Regulations 36, 37 and 38 Explained
Frequently asked questions
What is digital maturity in children’s social care?
It is the ability to combine technology, good data, governance, skilled people and effective service design so information can support better operations and decisions.
How many authorities in the DfE survey used Power BI?
96% of the 110 responding English local authorities reported using Power BI for reporting, dashboards or analysis. 78% reported using Excel.
How common is email for safeguarding data?
71% of surveyed authorities reported receiving safeguarding data from external partners via email attachments, while 25% used automated or API-based methods.
How many authorities were already using AI?
79% said their children’s services teams were using AI for some work, tasks or processes, but only 4% had a children’s-services-specific AI strategy.
Does digital maturity mean going paperless?
No. Going paperless is only one step. Digital maturity also includes data quality, interoperability, reporting, governance, staff skills, access and how well technology supports the service.
The DfE research cited here surveyed English local authorities, not individual Supported Accommodation or Children’s Home providers. The provider recommendations in this article are CareSync’s operational interpretation of the wider sector findings.