Key messages

Policy implications

Gaps

Commentary

This review provides a detailed picture of the adult social care workforce in Cornwall, linking workforce conditions to the wider local economy. By bringing together data on pay, turnover, skills and demographics, it highlights the complexity of sustaining care provision in a geographically diverse area. 

The findings show how workforce challenges are unevenly distributed. Differences in demographics, skills and turnover across Cornwall point to the limits of one-size-fits-all approaches to workforce planning and the importance of place-based strategies. 

From a care equity perspective, the review draws attention to who makes up the workforce and how their experiences vary. Gender, age, nationality, ethnicity and disability all shape access to employment, training and progression within adult social care. Where skills gaps or low pay persist, these patterns risk reinforcing inequities within the workforce and, in turn, affecting the quality and continuity of care. 

Overall, the report underlines that workforce strategy is inseparable from equity considerations. Addressing disparities in pay, skills and opportunity is not only central to supporting workers, but also to ensuring that adult social care can meet the needs of communities across Cornwall in a fair and sustainable way. 

Key messages 

Policy implications 

Gaps 

Commentary 
This paper examines the structural drivers of workforce shortages across the UK health and social care system. It highlights how long-standing issues in workforce planning have left services vulnerable to rising demand and demographic change. Recruitment and retention challenges, combined with workforce ageing and increasing service pressures, contribute to persistent staffing gaps. 

A key theme is the difference between workforce planning in the NHS and social care. While the NHS has national workforce planning mechanisms, social care remains more fragmented, with workforce planning largely shaped by local authority budgets and provider capacity. This creates variation in staffing stability and service provision across the system. 

Financial pressures also influence working conditions and career opportunities. Lower pay and fewer structured progression pathways in social care contribute to high turnover and recruitment difficulties, reinforcing the cycle of workforce shortages. 

In terms of care inequities, the paper highlights how workforce shortages can translate into uneven access to services. Areas with greater financial pressures or fewer available staff may experience more service disruptions and reduced continuity of care. At the same time, inequities within the workforce (particularly around pay and conditions between health and social care) reflect broader financial imbalances across the system. These dynamics demonstrate how funding structures influence both workforce stability and the distribution of care. 

Overall, the report argues that sustainable workforce planning requires coordinated policy across health and social care. Without long-term investment and strategic planning, workforce shortages will continue to affect service availability and contribute to financial and structural inequities in care provision.

Key statistics 

Key messages 

Policy implications 

Gaps 

Commentary 
This report looks at workforce inequities across health and adult social care and shows that these are not only staff issues. They also affect how care is delivered. The report was commissioned by CQC and combines survey data, interviews, literature review and case studies to understand what workforce inequities look like, what drives them and what helps reduce them. 

A central finding is that race and ethnicity-related inequities were the most commonly reported. Staff also reported inequities linked to sex or gender, disability, mental health conditions and nationality. Many respondents described overlapping forms of discrimination, which matters because people do not experience these issues one at a time in real life. 

The report makes clear that workforce inequities are shaped by both workplace culture and wider systems. Staff most often pointed to managers’ attitudes, colleagues’ attitudes and organisational culture as key drivers. That matters for care equity because staff who are excluded, ignored or treated unfairly may be less able to progress, less likely to stay, and less likely to speak up when something is wrong. 

The findings also show a clear link between workforce inequities and the quality of care. The report says staff experiencing inequities reported negative effects on service quality, care quality and interactions with people using services. In particular, more than 40% of respondents experiencing or observing race or ethnicity-related inequities reported poor interactions with patients or people using services. 

From a care equity perspective, this is important because inequities affecting staff can feed through into inequities affecting people who use services. If some parts of the workforce are more exposed to bullying, poorer progression, low pay or unsafe speaking up cultures, that can affect continuity, trust and service quality. It can also be worse in parts of the system already under pressure, including adult social care, smaller providers and areas facing recruitment and funding problems. 

Another useful finding is that the most common EDI activity was not seen as the most effective. Staff training and celebrating diversity were common, but respondents were more likely to value strong complaints systems, transparent data and visible senior leadership action. This suggests that tackling workforce inequities needs practical follow-through, not just awareness activity. 

Overall, the report shows that workforce inequities are part of wider structural problems in health and adult social care. Improving care equity means paying attention to how staff are treated, who is heard, who progresses, and who feels safe at work. Without that, inequities in the workforce are likely to continue affecting inequities in care. 

Key statistics 

Key messages 

Policy implications 

Gaps 

Commentary 

This study explores the challenges involved in recruiting and retaining staff in adult social care services in England. The social care workforce is large and diverse, yet the sector continues to experience difficulties attracting and retaining staff. 

Low pay and demanding working conditions are commonly cited reasons why people leave social care roles. Care providers must also compete with other sectors such as the NHS, hospitality and retail, which may offer higher wages or more stable working hours. These labour market pressures can make it difficult for social care employers to recruit and retain staff. 

Geography also influences workforce recruitment. In rural areas, care workers often need to travel between people’s homes to provide support. Where public transport is limited, workers may need access to a personal vehicle to take up these roles. This requirement can limit the pool of potential staff and make recruitment more difficult for rural providers. 

The report also highlights the influence of commissioning and funding arrangements. Social care providers often have limited control over service pricing because fees are set through local authority commissioning processes. When funding levels are constrained, providers may struggle to improve pay, invest in training or create more stable working conditions. 

From a health and social care equity perspective, workforce shortages can affect the availability and quality of care services. Areas that face greater recruitment challenges may experience reduced service capacity or higher staff turnover, which can affect continuity of care for people receiving support. 

Overall, the report suggests that improving recruitment and retention will require coordinated action across workforce policy, funding arrangements and labour market conditions. Addressing these issues is important for building a sustainable social care workforce and ensuring equitable access to care services across different regions. 

Key messages 

Policy implications 

Gaps 

Commentary 
This study sheds light on how low-paid health and social care workers interpreted their place within the UK’s pandemic response. Participants described feeling overshadowed by a dominant focus on the NHS, with social care framed as secondary despite its central role. 

The rapid and repeated changes to guidance intensified workplace stress. For many workers, the lack of stability compounded existing frustrations linked to low pay and insecure conditions, shaping how they understood government priorities. 

In terms of care equity, the findings point to structural imbalances within the workforce. When social care workers are consistently positioned as lower priority, this reinforces inequalities between sectors and undermines the status of roles that are disproportionately occupied by women and people from marginalised backgrounds. These dynamics have implications not only for workers’ wellbeing, but also for the quality and continuity of care. 

Overall, the paper highlights how crises can magnify longstanding workforce inequities. Addressing pay, recognition and inclusion in decision-making is essential if social care workers are to be treated as equal partners within the health and care system, rather than an afterthought during periods of national pressure. 

Key messages 

Policy implications 

Gaps 

Commentary 
This study provides a detailed account of how the COVID-19 pandemic affected the working lives of health and social care staff. It documents high levels of burnout, declining mental wellbeing and the cumulative impact of sustained pressure during crisis conditions. Participants described how staffing shortages and job insecurity intensified workloads and reduced the capacity of services to meet demand. These pressures also affected morale and the ability of workers to provide the quality of care they aspired to deliver. 

From a care equity perspective, the findings highlight how workforce strain can deepen inequities within care systems. Workers in lower-paid or less secure roles faced greater exposure to stress and burnout, while service users experienced variable support depending on staffing levels and workforce stability. These dynamics risk reinforcing uneven experiences of care across settings. 

Overall, the study stresses the importance of workforce wellbeing as a foundation for equitable care. Addressing mental health, pay and staffing issues is essential not only for supporting workers, but for sustaining fair and reliable health and social care services in the longer term.

Key messages 

Policy implications 

Gaps 

Commentary 
This study provides a detailed account of how care work is organised and experienced within residential homes for older people. By focusing on everyday routines and interactions, it shows how care quality emerges from the interaction between resources, organisational culture and staff practice. 

The findings emphasise that good care is not solely a function of individual commitment. Workforce culture and material conditions shape what care workers are able to do, how time is prioritised and how responsibilities are distributed across teams. 

From a care equity perspective, the study highlights how under-resourcing and time constraints can create uneven care experiences for residents. When staff are required to ration time or negotiate unclear responsibilities, some residents may receive more attentive care than others. These dynamics reflect broader inequities in how care is funded and organised, rather than individual failings of workers. 

Overall, the paper stresses the importance of viewing workforce conditions as central to equitable care. Ensuring fair allocation of time, clarity of roles and adequate resources is essential if residential care homes are to provide consistent and dignified care for all residents.

Key statistics 

Key messages 

Policy implications 

Gaps 

Commentary 
This report provides a stark account of the financial realities faced by residential care workers in the UK. By documenting high levels of poverty and food insecurity, it challenges assumptions that employment in care provides a stable route out of deprivation. 

The findings highlight how poor pay and insecure conditions are embedded within the structure of residential care. As demand for care grows, these conditions risk undermining recruitment and retention, placing further strain on an already stretched workforce. 

For care equity, the report exposes a contradiction at the heart of the care system. Workers who provide essential support to older and vulnerable people are themselves disproportionately affected by poverty and deprivation. These disparities are not incidental but reflect how care work is valued and funded, with implications for workforce wellbeing and continuity of care. 

Overall, the report argues that improving outcomes for people who draw on residential care cannot be separated from improving the living and working conditions of the workforce. Addressing poverty among care workers is a prerequisite for building a fair, resilient and sustainable adult social care system. 

Key messages 

Policy implications 

Gaps 

Commentary 
This study provides insight into how paid care workers in England understand their working conditions and the role of organising in addressing long-standing challenges. Participants described organising as both a response to low pay and poor conditions and a way of asserting professional identity within a marginalised sector. 

The findings show that care workers often feel disconnected from decision-making structures that shape their work. Organising activities were framed as efforts to make everyday realities visible to employers and policymakers, rather than solely as formal union activity. 

Considering care equity, the study highlights how unequal power within the workforce affects both workers and the people they support. When care workers’ voices are excluded from policy and practice, inequities in pay, security and conditions are sustained. These workforce inequities have downstream effects on continuity and quality of care, particularly in a sector employing large numbers of women and people from marginalised groups. 

Overall, the paper suggests that supporting care worker voices is not only a labour issue but a care issue. Strengthening avenues for collective input may contribute to fairer working conditions and a more equitable and stable care system.