Why we made this change
Occasionally assessors will need to request more information from an applicant or referee, in order to verify information and make a decision on an application for qualified teacher status (QTS). Sometimes it’s a missing detail on a degree certificate. Sometimes a referee hasn’t confirmed employment dates. Occasionally, two documents don’t quite align, and we need to clarify before moving forward.
These further information (FI) requests are an important part of how we make sure applications are assessed fairly. They give applicants a chance to clarify, update, or complete something, and they give assessors the information needed to make a well-informed decision.
Over time, we noticed a few things about how this worked.
Assessors could raise an FI request using our central Case Management System (CMS). However, if the assessor needed further details at a later stage in the assessment process, assessors didn’t have a clear way to follow up. Instead, they often had to switch to Zendesk Support, a separate platform outside of the core service.
This made it harder to keep track of what had been asked and answered as requests and responses were happening in different places, making things more complicated for assessors.
We wanted to change that by streamlining the process and making it better for everyone involved.
What we changed
We made a set of improvements to help applicants respond more easily, and to help assessors keep everything in one place:
- Improved the FI reasons to make them clearer and better meet the needs of the assessment team.
- We made the FI reasons more visible to applicants, so that they had more clarity about what they were being asked to do.
- Enabled assessors to send follow-up requests for further information directly in the CMS. This made it easier to see what the assessor had requested, the applicant’s response, and what needed to happen next.
- Enabled assessors to filter applications to see where applicants had replied and where they were still waiting on a response. This made the process easier to manage and helped prevent missed communication.
How we approached it
We started by reviewing the full list of reasons that assessors use to request further information. Over time, this list had grown and needed to be rationalised. We simplified and clarified the reasons, so that both assessors and applicants could better understand what was being asked and why.
We then asked:
How can we make this part of the journey fairer, simpler, and easier to follow, for both applicants and assessors?
We carried out research with applicants to understand how FI request could be improved. Applicants shared that, at times, they were unsure why they were being asked to provide specific information. When responding to more than one FI request, some told us they may have answered incorrectly because they did not realise the requests were for different items. This sometimes related to how they interpreted certain phrases or cultural nuances in English, rather than the intent of the assessor, who was following the set procedure.
We also conducted research with assessors to better understand the pain points in the FI request process. They shared that, when multiple FI requests were involved, there was no clear way to identify which specific request the applicant was responding to. The most time-consuming part of the workflow, however, was the need to switch between platforms, particularly having to exit the CMS to raise or respond to FI requests in Zendesk.
From this, the core need that emerged for applicants were:
- “I need clear, specific instructions when I’m asked for more information, so I can respond correctly and avoid delays in my application.”
- “I need to know why I am being asked for this information so I can respond correctly.”
For assessors, the needs that surfaced were:
- “I need to quickly identify which FI request an applicant is responding to so I can avoid delays and confusion.”
- “I need to manage FI requests without switching between platforms so I can stay focused and save time.”
We tested early designs for follow-up functionality with assessors. We also laid the groundwork for improving related templates in the system, so future communications can be even clearer and more helpful.
These changes are designed to:
- Give applicants a fairer, more transparent way to respond when more information is needed
- Help assessors manage the process in one place
- Reduce delays caused by confusion, missing responses, or follow-up across different systems