Funding Level Review

The Funding Level Review reads the evidence your school has already recorded for each student and asks one question: does what we have on file suggest this student's adjustment level is worth a fresh professional judgement?

It does not tell you what the level should be. It tells you where to look.

Accessing the report

1. Open the sidebar and expand the Reports section.
2. Click Funding Level Review, or go directly to /dashboard/reports/funding-level-review.

Decision support only

This is the most important thing to understand about the report, and it is stated on the page itself.

• Junipa never changes a recorded adjustment level. Only your staff do that.
• The report is not an NCCD determination. The determination is made by the team, through professional judgement and moderation.
• Junipa will never recommend changing a level in order to obtain funding. The prompt is about whether the recorded evidence and the recorded level are telling the same story, nothing more.

A prompt is an invitation to review a student, not an instruction to move them.

How Junipa forms the review prompt

Junipa looks at six signals that come from records your school has already made. They fall into two groups.

Quantitative signals, which describe the volume and breadth of support:

Signal	What it reflects
Recorded adjustments	How many adjustments have been recorded for the student in the reporting year.
Allocated support hours per week	The support hours per week recorded across the student's plans.
Stakeholder breadth	How many staff and contributors are named across the student's plans.

Teaching practice signals, which describe the depth and quality of planning:

Signal	What it reflects
Individual education plans	How many individual education plans the student has on file.
Plan completeness	How fully the fields in those plans have been filled in.
Plan detail	How substantive the recorded content of those plans is.

Junipa compares each signal against your organisation's review thresholds, then forms a combined picture across the two groups. A level for review only appears when enough of the six signals are actually recorded, with representation from both groups. If the minimum evidence set is not met, the student shows as More evidence needed rather than a level. That is a deliberate refusal to guess from a thin record.

Where a student's recorded evidence and their recorded level do line up, the report says No change indicated, which is a useful result in its own right at moderation time.

note

The exact calculation, including the live threshold values in use at your campus, is shown inside the app. It is deliberately kept in the app, next to the live data it is applied to, rather than reproduced here where it could drift out of date.

Show calculation

The calculation is collapsed by default, so the page opens on the students rather than the mechanics.

When you want the detail, use the Show calculation link. It opens the evidence drawer with the exact live values Junipa read and applied, in the app, next to the data they belong to.

Threshold sensitivity

The report includes a Threshold sensitivity slider so staff can explore what a stricter or a more relaxed position would look like.

• Move the slider and the page shows how many students meet the review criterion at the chosen sensitivity.
• Nothing is saved. The slider is an exploration tool for moderation conversations, not a settings change.
• The thresholds configured for your campus always remain the applied source, whatever the slider is showing.

Review thresholds

Thresholds are set by your organisation in Junipa Organisation and pushed down to each campus, so every campus starts from a consistent position. The report names the source it received them from.

Campus administrators can adjust the thresholds for their campus in Administration > General Settings. If the organisation settings cannot be read, Junipa applies its starting defaults and says so on the page, so you are never left guessing which values are in play.

Whatever is in force, the report shows the exact live values, applied to the campus evidence in the table below.

Reading the table

The report is deliberately front-loaded with the students who need attention.

• Rows sort so that potential changes come first, higher before lower, then students where no change is indicated, then students who need more evidence.
• Use the Review outcome filter to narrow to potential changes, review higher, review lower, no change indicated, or more evidence needed.
• The search box filters by student name or year level.
• The summary strip across the top gives you students reviewed, potential changes, the higher and lower split, how many students have a complete evidence profile, and the threshold source.
• Export downloads the current view as a CSV for moderation notes.

Each row shows the student, year level, current level, the level for review, the six signals, and an evidence coverage count. Where a signal has not been recorded, the row says Not recorded rather than showing a zero, so a gap in the record never looks like a low score.

Click a row to open the evidence drawer. It lists the measures Junipa actually read for that student in plain language, and reminds you what happens next. If nothing is on file for the reporting year, the drawer says so.

The report is scoped to a reporting year. Use the reporting year context at the top of the page to confirm which year you are looking at before you act on a prompt.

What to do with a prompt

A prompt starts a conversation. It does not finish one.

1. Open the student's evidence drawer and check what Junipa actually read.
2. Go to the student's journal, plans and evidence to see the full picture, including anything not captured by the six signals.
3. Weigh the record against the NCCD level descriptors, which cover the type, frequency, intensity and breadth of the support being provided. The report lists the descriptors for QDTP, Supplementary, Substantial and Extensive on the page for reference.
4. Take it to moderation. Adjustment level is a team judgement, and a prompt is most useful as an agenda item for that discussion.
5. If the team decides the level should change, make that change in Junipa yourself, where it is recorded against you and appears in the Adjustment Level Changes report.
6. If the prompt is More evidence needed, the action is to record the evidence, not to change the level. The student may be perfectly well placed. Junipa simply does not have enough on file to say anything useful.

For the official guidance on choosing a level, see the NCCD's What level of adjustment is being provided?

note

A student is only included once they have a recorded adjustment level. Students with no level recorded for the reporting year do not appear, so use this report alongside your usual identification process rather than in place of it.

For the record of levels that have already moved during the year, see Adjustment Level Changes. For how well plans cover the cohort, see Plan Coverage.