Specific review scenarios: No reported change

An individual reports no change to their level of needs or conditions.

This is in line with our expectations, as based on the information on their award, we were not expecting to see a change.

You should aim to conclude the award review quickly.

If you decide that it is unlikely that the individual’s conditions or needs will change, you should set a long review period (between 5 and 10 years).

If you decide that it is highly unlikely that the individual’s conditions or need will change, you should consider giving an indefinite award. Scenario 2: No change, but a change was expected

An individual reports no change to their conditions or level of needs. This is not in line with our expectations, as based on the information on their award, we were expecting to see a change.

You should both:

• treat this as an inconsistency
• proceed as usual when exploring inconsistencies in information to establish whether the inconsistency is relevant.

This could, for example, involve checking guidance or requesting a case discussion. If the inconsistency is indeed relevant, you should choose from the set of options below to explore and resolve it:

• Contact the individual or their client representative to ask follow-up questions. Here, you must ensure that this phone call does not become, or feel to the individual like, a de-facto consultation. Consultations only exist for Adult Disability Payment. For more details, see operational guidance on contacting individuals with follow-up questions
• Choose the decision-making tool that is most appropriate/most likely to provide the information you need.

There are a number of decision-making tools for you to use:

• Consulting guidance (DMG, Operational Guidance, Medical Guidance)
• Case discussion
• Requesting supporting information

Supporting information:

• is just one of several decision-making tools
• should not be the default step to take

when establishing the individual’s level of need.

Rather, you should choose the action based on what’s most appropriate in the review at hand. As part of that consideration, you should consider what’s best for the individual. For example, a quick phone call to ask a follow-up question might be better than the individual having to:

• collect supporting information from their wider support network
• wait a number of weeks until your request for supporting information has been answered by the contact the individual has provided.

If you decide that gathering supporting information is the most appropriate decision making tool, you need to decide which source would be best-placed to provide the information you need. This can be a professional or a member of the individual’s wider support network. Crucially, requesting supporting information should be done with the goal to more fully understand the individual’s new level of needs. The aim here is not to “verify” what the individual has told us.