The literature on trust has primarily focused on trust relationships between a trustor and a trustee. However, in public organizations and services, multiple actors interact, creating a diverse network of trust relationships. Drawing on a case study of elder care services, this paper investigates trust dynamics among various core actors, including the market, governments, family members and care workers. Furthermore, its approach moves beyond the traditional vertical and horizontal trust dichotomy, to propose a new theoretical framework comprising Organizational and Social trust relationships. The study explores how these multiple relationships coexist within the same service and examines the extent to which trust anchors—specifically the dimensions of performance, benevolence, and integrity—are shared or diverge among interviewees. The paper also distinguishes between two key attitudes in which these trust relationships can be grounded: a “watchful trust” approach, characterized by a sceptical attitude combined with accountability measures, and a "good faith trust" one which involves unconditional confidence in the trustee’s intentions.

The research follows a qualitative approach based on 30 semi-structured interviews conducted between 2022 and 2025 with four key groups: regional and local government representatives, nursing home firms and business associations, care workers, and residents’ relatives. Provisional findings mirror a fragmented and asymmetrical trust landscape. Governments rely on organizational trust mechanisms centred on inspections and performance controls, yet these are widely perceived by relatives and care workers as insufficient or merely symbolic. In response, relatives often develop a deeply sceptical stance towards institutions and providers—frequently framed through assumptions of profit-driven collusion—while simultaneously extending good faith trust to front-line care workers, grounded in perceived vocational benevolence. Providers attempt to cultivate trust through transparency measures and certifications, but face persistent social stigma. Care workers, meanwhile, maintain good faith bonds with relatives while expressing distrust towards governments and providers due to chronic underinvestment and limited capacity to enforce accountability.

A key contribution of this paper is the identification of a significant mismatch between the trust attitude actors “aspire to adopt” and the attitude they are effectively “constrained to operate with”. While most actors, including governments and relatives, desire to adopt a watchful trust stance grounded in accountability checks, they are frequently constrained by structural limitations, such as resource scarcity and lack of alternative care options. Consequently, many are forced to operate under a good faith trust approach by default, treating trust as a coping mechanism rather than a choice.

Finally, provisional results suggest that trust functions as a “fragile social currency” that carries the service on despite significant governance deficits. By highlighting how power asymmetries and regulatory ambiguities shape trust relationships within the Spanish nursing home services, this study invites reflection on how public care systems, when deprived of adequate resources and credible accountability mechanisms, end up reproducing dependency-based forms of trust that mirror governance deficits rather than resolving them.