The National Care Contract: Revising the Framework

If we want a National Care Service, we need to ask a fundamental question: what should the national deal actually be between the people who provide care, the people who commission it, the people who pay for it and the people whose lives depend upon it?

For decades, adult social care in England has operated without a single national employment framework equivalent to those found elsewhere in public services.

Care is delivered through thousands of organisations, commissioned through different arrangements and funded through a mixture of public and private money.

That diversity can create innovation and choice.

It can also create fragmentation.

Two people doing substantially similar care work can experience different pay, training, progression, travel arrangements, sick pay and employment conditions depending upon who employs them and where they work.

In 2026, that framework is beginning to change.

The Government has now confirmed the structure for England’s first Adult Social Care Fair Pay Agreement, enabled by the Employment Rights Act 2025. A new Adult Social Care Negotiating Body will bring employers and trade unions together to negotiate minimum standards across the sector. The first negotiations are expected to begin in 2027, with the agreement intended to take effect in 2028. (GOV.UK)

But One Social Care thinks this creates an opportunity to ask a bigger question.

Could this become the foundation for something closer to a National Care Contract?

Not simply a contract of employment.

A new social contract for care.

What is changing?

The Fair Pay Agreement represents a significant structural change.

Until now, there has been no legislatively mandated sector-wide collective bargaining system for adult social care in England. The Employment Rights Act 2025 creates the framework through which this can now happen. (Legislation.gov.uk)

The Government confirmed in July 2026 that the new negotiating body will bring together representatives of employers and workers.

Its remit can extend beyond basic pay to include:

• terms and conditions;
• training;
• career progression;
• people and culture policies;
• additional employment benefits.

The first agreement is backed by £500 million for 2028–29. (GOV.UK)

Read the Government’s Fair Pay Agreement consultation response

That matters.

For the first time, England is creating machinery capable of establishing legally backed minimum employment standards across much of the adult social care workforce.

But pay is only one part of the care economy

Pay matters enormously.

A workforce cannot be valued rhetorically while remaining economically undervalued.

But changing an hourly rate without examining the wider system could leave some of the underlying problems untouched.

Think about what sits behind a single hour of domiciliary care.

Someone has to recruit the worker.

Train them.

Complete employment and safeguarding checks.

Schedule the visit.

Travel to the person’s home.

Record what happened.

Supervise the worker.

Maintain insurance.

Operate the service.

Meet regulatory requirements.

Commission and fund the care.

And ultimately someone — the state, a local authority or an individual and their family — has to pay for it.

So the question cannot only be:

What should a care worker earn?

We also need to ask:

What does it actually cost to deliver good care?

Commissioning belongs in the conversation

This is one of the most important connections.

The Government’s own consultation found consistent concern across stakeholders about funding sustainability, commissioning reform, clear guidance and effective implementation. (GOV.UK)

The Government also acknowledges that commissioners need to be involved if the Fair Pay Agreement is going to work. (GOV.UK)

That makes sense.

A provider cannot sustainably improve wages and employment conditions if the price paid for care does not reflect the true cost of providing it.

Otherwise we risk creating an impossible equation:

better pay + inadequate commissioning = greater pressure somewhere else.

That pressure may appear as reduced staffing, shorter visits, financial instability, providers leaving markets or increased costs for people funding their own care.

A national workforce settlement therefore needs to connect with the economics of commissioning.

What could a National Care Contract contain?

One Social Care proposes that we start thinking beyond a narrow employment agreement towards a broader framework.

Not necessarily one identical employment contract imposed on every organisation.

Instead, a national floor beneath which care should not fall.

That could eventually connect several things currently being developed separately.

1. A fair minimum for pay

Care work should have a nationally understood value.

The Fair Pay Agreement creates a mechanism through which that can begin to be negotiated.

But the framework should also recognise experience, specialist knowledge and increasing responsibility.

2. Clear terms and conditions

Pay is only one component of employment.

A stronger framework could consider issues such as:

• sick pay;
• travel time;
• mileage;
• predictable working arrangements;
• pensions;
• leave;
• wellbeing;
• supervision;
• occupational support.

The Fair Pay Agreement negotiating body will have statutory scope to consider pay and terms and conditions, alongside wider employment matters. (GOV.UK)

3. A national career structure

This is already developing.

The Government’s Care Workforce Pathway is intended to establish a universal career structure across adult social care, helping people understand roles, skills and progression.

The pathway and Fair Pay Agreement are explicitly being developed as complementary reforms. (GOV.UK)

Explore the Care Workforce Pathway

Imagine being able to enter care and see clearly:

where you begin → what you learn → how you progress → what responsibility means → how your pay develops.

That begins to look like a profession rather than a collection of jobs.

4. Portable skills and learning

People move between employers.

Their knowledge moves with them.

Our systems should recognise that.

A national framework could help make qualifications, competencies and recognised professional development more portable across the care sector.

That would benefit workers.

But it could also benefit employers and the people receiving support because valuable knowledge would be easier to recognise.

5. Safeguarding and workforce assurance

There is another piece that deserves much more attention.

If we are building a national workforce framework, we should ask what minimum workforce assurance should travel with the person.

Identity.

Right to work.

Relevant qualifications.

Training.

Enhanced DBS status where appropriate.

Employment history.

Professional development.

Safeguarding information where it can lawfully be shared.

This connects directly with the wider debate about a National Care Registry and with the safeguarding questions being raised through Richard’s Law.

A national employment framework without corresponding workforce assurance would solve only part of the problem.

The missing workforce

There is also a significant limitation in the current Fair Pay Agreement proposals.

The Government has confirmed that the agreement will apply to the paid adult social care workforce covered by the Employment Rights Act definition, but will not include unpaid carers, self-employed workers or people working through informal care arrangements. (GOV.UK)

That distinction deserves public attention.

An increasing amount of care can exist outside conventional employment relationships.

People using Direct Payments may engage their own support.

Self-funding families may employ or contract individuals directly.

Workers may operate independently.

And millions of unpaid carers provide care entirely outside the paid workforce.

So when we talk about a national framework for care, we need to be very clear about:

who is inside it — and who remains outside it.

The Government says the impact on self-employed workers will be monitored and that employment status and protections for self-employed people will be considered separately. (GOV.UK)

For One Social Care, that is an area worth watching closely.

Who pays?

Eventually every discussion about social care reaches money.

A National Care Contract cannot simply establish better standards without answering how those standards are funded.

The Government has allocated £500 million for the first Fair Pay Agreement in 2028–29. The Secretary of State’s remit letter is expected to tell the negotiating body the maximum funding available to councils to meet increased costs. (GOV.UK)

But this creates another question.

What happens after the first year?

If care becomes more expensive because we finally pay people properly, that is not necessarily a failure.

It may reveal something we should have acknowledged long ago:

good care has a real cost.

The challenge is deciding how that cost should be shared fairly and sustainably.

A contract has two sides

There is another reason we use the phrase National Care Contract.

Contracts describe responsibilities between parties.

The workforce has responsibilities.

Providers have responsibilities.

Commissioners have responsibilities.

Government has responsibilities.

Regulators have responsibilities.

And people drawing on care should have enforceable rights, choices and protections.

A genuine national framework could therefore begin connecting:

**Workforce rights

• Provider sustainability
• Commissioning responsibility
• Safeguarding
• Training and professional development
• Public accountability
• People’s rights and choice.**

That is much more powerful than treating each problem separately.

From workforce reform to a National Care Service

The Government itself describes the Fair Pay Agreement as an important step towards creating a National Care Service. (GOV.UK)

That makes the design choices being made now particularly important.

Because national systems do not suddenly appear fully formed.

They are assembled from frameworks.

Standards.

Rights.

Funding mechanisms.

Data.

Workforce structures.

Accountability.

And expectations.

The Fair Pay Agreement could therefore be more than a pay reform.

It could become one of the foundations upon which something much larger is built.

Who. What. Why. When. Wonder.

Who? Care workers, people drawing on care, families, providers, commissioners, councils, unions, independent workers, regulators and government.

What? A nationally understood minimum framework for what good employment and sustainable care provision should look like.

Why? Because national expectations cannot sustainably sit on top of fragmented employment and commissioning arrangements.

When? Now. The negotiating body is being established in 2026, negotiations are expected in 2027 and the first Fair Pay Agreement is planned to take effect in 2028. (GOV.UK)

Wonder: If we were designing the care system from scratch today, what would we put into the contract between society and the people who provide our care?

Take it into The Exchange

This is one I would actively invite care workers, providers, people drawing on care and commissioners to answer:

What should be guaranteed in a National Care Contract?

Choose your five.

Pay?

Travel time?

Training?

Sick pay?

Career progression?

DBS and workforce checks?

Minimum commissioning rates?

Continuity of care?

Portable qualifications?

Worker wellbeing?

Rights for people receiving care?

Something we’ve missed?

And then ask the harder question:

Who should pay for those guarantees?

Because revising the framework isn’t simply about deciding what we want from social care.

It’s about deciding what we are collectively prepared to put underneath it.