Hiring and Sponsoring Childminders (SOC Code 6114)

SOC 6114 covers childminders, but before treating this as a standard Skilled Worker sponsorship case, employers need to confront a structural problem: registered childminders in England are almost always self-employed and Ofsted-registered in their own right, and the Skilled Worker route requires a genuine employer-employee relationship, not a self-employment or franchise-style arrangement.

‍

The self-employment issue most employers miss

‍

A sponsor licence lets you employ a worker directly under your control and direction — set hours, assigned duties, PAYE payroll, the standard markers of employment. A registered childminder typically operates their own registered setting, sets their own fees, and is not supervised in the way sponsorship rules expect. Sponsoring someone into a role that is, in substance, self-employment is one of the more clear-cut ways a licence holder can fail the genuine vacancy test, regardless of how the contract is worded on paper.

‍

The test the Home Office applies looks past the label on the contract to the substance of the working relationship: who sets the hours, who bears the financial risk, whether the individual can send a substitute to cover their absence, and whether they are integrated into the sponsor's business the way an employee would be. A written employment contract that says the right things on paper doesn't help if the day-to-day reality — the worker choosing their own fees, running their own registered setting, and taking on their own liability — points the other way.

‍

Childminder agencies don't automatically solve the problem

‍

Ofsted-registered childminder agencies exist to provide support, quality assurance, and sometimes administrative services to affiliated childminders, and it's tempting to assume that affiliating a sponsored worker to an agency creates the employment relationship sponsorship needs. In most agency models it doesn't — the childminder is still typically self-employed and registered individually, with the agency acting more like a membership body or quality-assurance layer than an employer. If you're considering sponsoring someone through an agency structure, look closely at who actually directs the work, sets pay, and bears financial risk before assuming the agency relationship changes the underlying employment analysis.

‍

When sponsorship can genuinely work

‍

Sponsorship is more realistically viable where the individual is employed directly by a nursery or childcare business as a practitioner under proper employment terms, rather than operating as an independent registered childminder. If that is the actual arrangement, check whether the duties and qualifications match a different SOC code more accurately than 6114, and run the role through the same going rate check as any other Skilled Worker case.

‍

A nursery-employed practitioner role, or a coordination and supervisory role at a registered early years setting, is a fundamentally different case from home-based childminding, even where the day-to-day work involves similar activities. Our guide to child and early years officers covers the supervisory-level code that many genuinely employed early years staff should be assessed against instead.

‍

Warning signs a childminding case won't pass genuine vacancy

‍

Before committing time to a case built around SOC 6114, check for these markers, any one of which should prompt a closer look at whether real employment exists:

‍

• The individual is, or would be, registered with Ofsted in their own name as the childminder for the setting, rather than the business holding the registration
• Fees are set, or negotiated directly, by the individual with the parents, rather than fixed by the sponsoring business
• The setting is the individual's own home, rather than premises controlled by the employer
• There is no PAYE payroll relationship, or payments are structured as invoiced fees rather than salary
• The individual can decide their own hours and which children or families to take on, without the sponsor directing this

‍

Any one of these on its own is worth investigating; several together make it very unlikely the arrangement will hold up as genuine employment.

‍

Right to work and safeguarding still apply regardless of route

‍

Whatever the employment structure, anyone caring for children in a registered setting needs both safeguarding vetting and verified right-to-work status before starting — see our guide to checking immigration status via share codes for how to run this check correctly and keep the evidence on file.

‍

The cost of getting this wrong

‍

A failed genuine vacancy determination on a role like this doesn't just cost the individual their visa application — it's a realistic trigger for a licence review, and a pattern of certificates issued for roles that don't reflect genuine employment is exactly the kind of finding a compliance visit is designed to catch. Because licence action can affect every worker you sponsor, not just the one case in question, it's worth treating any borderline SOC 6114 case as a decision for your compliance lead rather than something a hiring manager signs off alone.

‍

Sponsor duties on genuine employment

‍

The Home Office's sponsor duties and compliance guidance makes clear that sponsors are responsible for the genuineness of the employment relationship they certify, and getting this wrong on a role like childminding — where self-employment is the norm rather than the exception — is a realistic trigger for licence action. If you are unsure whether a specific arrangement qualifies, it is worth reviewing the case structure with your compliance processes before issuing a certificate of sponsorship rather than after.

‍

Keeping the underlying employment evidence — payroll records, the contract, working-hours records, and correspondence showing who actually directs the work — in a single, auditable place through the secure document management system you use for other sponsored roles makes it much easier to demonstrate a genuine employment relationship if it's ever questioned, and just as importantly, makes it easier for your own compliance team to spot a case that doesn't stack up before a certificate is issued rather than after.

‍

FAQs

‍

Can a childminder agency sponsor its affiliated childminders? Generally no, if the childminders remain self-employed and individually Ofsted-registered — the agency relationship on its own doesn't usually create the direct employer control that sponsorship requires, so this needs assessing case by case rather than assumed.

‍

What SOC code should a nursery-employed early years practitioner use instead? It depends on the actual duties — a general practitioner role may sit under a different childcare occupation code, while a role with genuine supervisory or coordination responsibility may fit SOC 3222; match the code to the real duties rather than the job title.

‍

Does self-employment always rule out Skilled Worker sponsorship? Yes, in the sense that the Skilled Worker route requires genuine employment under the sponsor's direction — a role that is, in substance, self-employment or freelance work isn't eligible regardless of the occupation code involved.