Child Disability Payment decision making guide
Examples of typical changes in mobility or care needs
Changes in the level of the individual’s need that could lead to an unscheduled review include:
- an increase in care needs due to a worsening of their condition
- the individual receives medical treatment which decreases or stops the individual’s needs
- the individual continues to require attention or supervision past the age at which a child without a disability would normally require it
- an individual who requires assistance moving around outdoors reaches the age of 5 and may be entitled to the lower rate of the mobility component
- an individual who has a severe visual impairment reaches the age of 3 and may be entitled to the higher rate of the mobility component.
This list is not exhaustive.
Once the review is complete, the case manager:
- makes a determination on the individual’s entitlement to CDP, taking into account the change in circumstances, and
- sends the individual the notice of this new determination.
Hazal is 9 and has a learning disability. She is entitled to the middle rate of the care component of CDP. This is because she requires attention and supervision during the day. Recently, Hazal:
- has been having trouble getting settled for bed in the evening
- requires prolonged attention throughout the night when she wakes up. A specialist determines that Hazal has attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
Hazal’s parents inform Social Security Scotland that Hazal’s needs have changed. A case manager carries out an unscheduled review of Hazal’s award of CDP. They determine that Hazal is now entitled to the highest rate of the care component of CDP. This is because Hazal requires attention throughout the day and night, satisfying the ‘day criterion’ and ‘night criterion’.
Taylor has cerebral palsy and is entitled to the lowest rate of the care component of CDP. Taylor has recently turned 10 and still requires attention during the day in relation to his bodily functions. He requires attention:
- when going to the toilet
- taking a shower
- getting dressed.
The case manager carries out an unscheduled review of Taylor’s award of CDP. When Taylor was younger, many of his care needs did not qualify for assistance. This was because they were not ‘substantially in excess’ of what is normally required for a child of the same age without a disability. Taylor is now older but his care needs have not changed.
The case manager determines that Taylor is entitled to the middle rate of the care component of CDP. This is because his care needs are substantially in excess of what is normally required for children his age without a disability.
Sammy is 11 and has Down’s syndrome. He is entitled to the middle rate of the care component of CDP. This is because he requires attention frequently throughout the day. Sammy’s carers contact Social Security Scotland to report that they are spending more time encouraging Sammy to choose healthy activities and exercise.
Social Security Scotland must make an unscheduled review as they have become aware of a change of circumstances. This change could possibly result in an alteration to the level of Sammy’s award.
The case manager determines that Sammy’s award of CDP will remain the same. This is because, while Sammy requires more frequent attention during the day, he does not require it at night. This means he only meets the day criterion. Individuals must meet the day and night criteria to be entitled to the highest rate of the care component.
Case managers can extend the review date of an individual’s award as part of their determination, if appropriate. This is true even if an individual’s needs have not changed.
A case manager should only set an award review date earlier if they receive new information that justifies doing this.
Gilly is 8 and has been experiencing joint pain and joint dislocations regularly for 2 years. She requires attention throughout the day to relocate her joints when they dislocate. She frequently has days when she can’t attend school due to fatigue. She has been entitled to the middle rate of the care component and the higher rate of the mobility component for a year and a half.
The review period was set for 2 years because:
- medical tests are still being done
- it is unclear whether treatment is possible.
The review is set to start on 6 Oct this year. Gilly’s parents send an updated piece of supporting information, 7 months before the review date. The supporting information confirmed that Gilly:
- has a diagnosis of Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome
- has symptoms that are expected to remain the same.
The case manager considers extending the time until the next review of Gilly’s award. They take part in a case discussion with a practitioner who provides more information on Ehles-Danlos Syndrome. The case manager determines that Gilly’s award review period should be extended because they now have a clearer understanding of Gilly's prognosis. Her award will now be reviewed in 5 years’ time when Gilly is 13.
Ana is 12 and is entitled to the highest rate of the care component and higher rate of the mobility component of CDP. Ana’s award will not be reviewed before she turns When Ana is 13, her parents inform Social Security Scotland that her care needs have increased because her condition has worsened.
The case manager is not required to review Ana’s award because there has not been a change of circumstances that would possibly result in an alternation: Ana is already on the highest possible rate of the care and mobility components. Also, Ana’s award cannot be extended. Ana’s parents are informed that Social Security Scotland will not carry out a review for this reason.
For more detail on when it is unnecessary to review a case, refer to Unnecessary to review.