# AI in adult social care: what CQC expects, and where dignity comes first

*Care planning tools, sensors and monitoring: what the regulator expects, what people must be told, and when to say no.*

## Production summary

- Modules to record: 2
- Total script: 976 words, about 7 minutes of finished audio
- Voices: Emma (host) and George (practice educator)
- Level: Care workers, senior carers, team leaders, registered managers and nominated individuals

## Accreditation wording that must appear in the description

- **The CPD Certification Service** (planned): Application scheduled.
- **Care Quality Commission: AI in health and social care (May 2026)** (aligned): Written against CQC's published statement of its role, expectations and plans. Our own mapping, with no endorsement from CQC implied.
- **Skills for Care and the Care Certificate standards** (aligned): Consistent with the published standards on privacy and dignity, handling information and duty of care. Our own mapping, with no endorsement implied.

> Do not upgrade any of these words in a description or a thumbnail. Aligned is not accredited, and planned is not approved.


---

## What CQC expects when AI is used in care

**Runtime** about 3 minutes. **Words** 464. **Starts at** 00:00 in the full course recording.

### Learning outcomes to state on camera

- Describe the main uses of AI in adult social care
- State that CQC assesses AI through existing regulations
- List what CQC expects of providers using AI
- Check an AI drafted care record
- Explain why unapproved tools must not be used for care information

### Script


`[CUE 1]` *Two families of AI in care: pain estimation and sensors on one side, drafted notes and rotas on the other*

**EMMA**  [00:00]
George, our care home's new records system writes the notes for you. You say a few words and out comes a paragraph. Is that allowed?

**GEORGE**  [00:10]
It's allowed. Whether it's safe depends on what you do next. Let me set out where AI turns up in care first. There's guidance for providers from the Digital Care Hub, published in 2025 and commissioned by NHS England's Digitising Social Care programme.

**EMMA**  [00:27]
What does it cover?

**GEORGE**  [00:28]
Two families. In care delivery, tools that estimate pain from a person's face, and sensors that detect movement, sound or a fall. And in administration, software that drafts notes and plans, writes rotas, summarises documents.


`[CUE 2]` *The CQC statement dated 21 May 2026 beside Regulation 12 and Regulation 17, with no new rulebook*

**EMMA**  [00:42]
And what does it recommend?

**GEORGE**  [00:44]
Good data going in, secure and ethical use, human oversight, and training. It even includes a template AI policy.

**EMMA**  [00:52]
What about CQC? Do they have rules on this?

**GEORGE**  [00:56]
They published their first statement on 21 May 2026. The central point is that there's no separate AI rulebook. They look at AI through the existing regulations. Safe care and treatment, Regulation 12. And good governance, Regulation 17.


`[CUE 3]` *Six expectations as six cards*

**EMMA**  [01:11]
So using AI won't mark us down.

**GEORGE**  [01:14]
Not in itself. How it's governed, checked and explained is what counts. A service using a tool nobody understands is worse off than one using no tool.

**EMMA**  [01:24]
What do they actually expect?

**GEORGE**  [01:26]
Six things, in summary. AI supports human decisions and doesn't replace them. Trained staff check what it produces. People are told and given a choice, with an alternative that doesn't depend on it.


`[CUE 4]` *A drafted care note with ate well highlighted and a carer correcting it, with four things to check*

**EMMA**  [01:40]
That's three.

**GEORGE**  [01:40]
It's safe, reliable and fair for everyone. It's secure and lawful with data. And it's governed. Staff trained, a data protection impact assessment done, and a clear way to report when something goes wrong. Read the statement itself for the exact wording.

**EMMA**  [01:57]
Back to my notes. What can go wrong with a drafted one?

**GEORGE**  [02:02]
It reads well and it may be wrong. It can add something usual that didn't happen. Ate well, when she left most of it. It can leave out something that did happen. Or change a detail.


`[CUE 5]` *A personal phone with an unapproved app crossed out, and a care worker telling their manager*

**EMMA**  [02:16]
So what do I check?

**GEORGE**  [02:18]
Four things before you save. Medicines. Falls and injuries. Food and fluids. And what the person said or chose. Then ask what happened that isn't there.

**EMMA**  [02:29]
And if I'm on a home visit and use an app on my own phone?

**GEORGE**  [02:35]
Don't, unless your employer has approved it. A tool you chose isn't covered by their data protection arrangements, and care information is special category data. The strongest protection in law.

**EMMA**  [02:47]
I think some of the team already do.

**GEORGE**  [02:50]
Then they should tell the manager straight away, and the manager should make it easy to. A care record is evidence of what happened to a person. If you wouldn't have written that sentence yourself, don't save it.

### Sources for the on screen credit

- Artificial intelligence in health and social care: CQC's role, expectations and plans (21 May 2026), Care Quality Commission
- New guidance on AI in care delivery (July 2025), Homecare Association, reporting the Digital Care Hub guidance
- Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, Regulations 12 and 17, legislation.gov.uk
- Digital Care Hub: guidance and resources for adult social care providers, Digital Care Hub

---

## Consent, dignity and saying no

**Runtime** about 3 minutes. **Words** 512. **Starts at** 03:05 in the full course recording.

### Learning outcomes to state on camera

- Explain what a person must be told about AI in their care
- Describe the choice people must have
- Apply the Mental Capacity Act to monitoring technology
- Recognise when monitoring threatens privacy and dignity
- Raise a concern about an AI tool

### Script


`[CUE 1]` *A carer explaining a sensor to a resident in plain words, with five things to cover and a clear option to decline*

**EMMA**  [03:05]
George, we've had acoustic sensors fitted in the bedrooms. They listen for falls at night. Nobody asked the residents. Is that a problem?

**GEORGE**  [03:14]
Yes. CQC expects people to be given information about the part AI plays in their care, and to have a choice. With an alternative that doesn't rely on the technology.

**EMMA**  [03:26]
What do we have to tell them?

**GEORGE**  [03:29]
In ordinary words. What it is, what it does, what it records, who sees it, and that they can say no. At a moment they can take it in. Not buried in an admission pack.


`[CUE 2]` *The Mental Capacity Act principles beside a sensor, with all night crossed out and two hours after medication chosen*

**EMMA**  [03:43]
And if they say no?

**GEORGE**  [03:45]
Then it has to be a real no. If declining the sensor means a worse service, it wasn't a choice.

**EMMA**  [03:53]
Half our residents couldn't make that decision.

**GEORGE**  [03:56]
Then the Mental Capacity Act applies, as it does to any decision. Assume capacity. Support the person to decide. An unwise decision isn't a lack of capacity. And if they can't decide, act in their best interests and choose the least restrictive option.


`[CUE 3]` *A relative's request beside a best interests decision record*

**EMMA**  [04:13]
What does least restrictive mean for a sensor?

**GEORGE**  [04:16]
It's a real question. Is it needed all night, or for the two hours after medication? Is a camera needed when a pressure mat would do? Monitoring restricts privacy, so less is better where less will do.

**EMMA**  [04:31]
One daughter asked us to put a camera in.

**GEORGE**  [04:35]
A family member asking isn't consent. Unless she holds a relevant lasting power of attorney or deputyship, it's a best interests decision the service must make and record. And continuous monitoring can be part of what makes someone's arrangements a deprivation of liberty, which needs proper authorisation.


`[CUE 4]` *The same sensor shown twice: sparing a person from being woken, and replacing night staff who never come*

**EMMA**  [04:53]
Is all this monitoring a bad thing, then?

**GEORGE**  [04:57]
Not at all. There's a useful test. In 2024 care workers and researchers, brought together by Oxford, the Care Workers' Charity and the Digital Care Hub, defined responsible use as supporting and not undermining human rights, independence, choice and control, dignity, equality and wellbeing.

**EMMA**  [05:14]
Give me an example either way.

**GEORGE**  [05:17]
A sensor that means someone isn't woken every two hours by a torch at the door adds to their dignity. The same sensor, used to justify fewer staff at night with nobody coming when it sounds, takes it away.


`[CUE 5]` *Four reasons to stop and ask, and a route from manager to whistleblowing to the regulator*

**EMMA**  [05:32]
We also have an app that reads pain from a face.

**GEORGE**  [05:37]
Then know that tools can be less accurate for some people than others. It may have been tested mostly on faces unlike the person in front of you. If what it says doesn't match what you see, trust what you see and report it.

**EMMA**  [05:54]
And when should I refuse to use something?

**GEORGE**  [05:57]
When it's used without the person knowing. When it stands in for a check a human should make. When its output doesn't match the person you know. Or when nobody's approved it.

**EMMA**  [06:10]
Who do I tell?

**GEORGE**  [06:12]
Your manager first. Then your whistleblowing route, and you can contact CQC directly. A concern about a tool is a concern about care. Ask of anything new: does this help me be with this person more, or does it stand in for me being there?

### Sources for the on screen credit

- Artificial intelligence in health and social care: CQC's role, expectations and plans (21 May 2026), Care Quality Commission
- Care workers' guidance and statement of expectations on the responsible use of AI, and particularly generative AI, in adult social care, The Care Workers' Charity, University of Oxford Institute for Ethics in AI and Digital Care Hub
- Mental Capacity Act 2005, legislation.gov.uk
- Mental Capacity Act Code of Practice, GOV.UK

---

*Copyright WAJD Group. Built by WAJD AI.*