ADM.7:4 - Solution
ADM.7:4.1 - State the claim and receiving action
Specify what needs to be true, for whom or what, under which relevant rule and time, and which action depends on the answer. Split a compound claim only when its components need different sources or can lead to different actions.
Ask what a wrong positive or negative answer would change. That consequence helps identify the applicable evidence requirement and any needed specialist contribution; it does not authorize the handler to invent a numerical confidence threshold.
For example, proving that a claimant has an effective assignment does not prove that a particular expense falls under it. Checking the expense’s category does not establish that it has not already been reimbursed. Select only the claims actually required for the receiving action.
ADM.7:4.2 - Match available evidence to the claim
Recover an existing result before commissioning another check. Identify the actual subject, source, criterion, relevant time and stated limitations. Establish enough correspondence to know that the result concerns this person, expense, grant or provider attempt.
Distinguish the source’s identity from the truth of its content. A signed record can support an origin claim while leaving scope, effective date or substantive correctness disputed. A.10 supplies source recovery and bounded reliance when that account needs to remain inspectable; it does not perform the domain check.
Use ADM.3 for a live effective-time question and ADM.4 when participant accounts or cross-source identity prevent the match. Do not build a larger evidence record when the ordinary source and its conditions already answer the question.
ADM.7:4.3 - Reuse the result or perform the smallest competent check
Reuse a result while its subject, criterion and action-changing conditions match the current use. Name the specific change that would defeat reuse: a different person, a revised policy, a revoked grant, an altered subject or a later time outside the result’s scope.
When evidence is insufficient, select the qualified procedure or competent person that can answer the remaining question. A records custodian may recover a decision; the authorized specialist may interpret a rule; the payment provider may establish an attempt’s effect. A new generic document request cannot replace any of these.
If a domain method is missing, return that method gap through ADM.6. If a separately required assurance claim is current, B.3 supplies the argument about that exact claim and use. Consequence alone does not require constructing such an assurance claim.
ADM.7:4.4 - Preserve each action-changing outcome
Return the substantive result in ordinary language and retain distinctions the next action needs.
| Outcome | Meaning and continuation |
|---|---|
| The claim is supported for the stated use | The deciding person or handler may use that result under the applicable rule; the check itself does not grant permission or perform provision. |
| Evidence supports the negative condition | Apply the service rule’s response to that established negative result. |
| The evidence is insufficient or conflicting | Preserve the unresolved claim and request the particular additional evidence or judgment needed. |
| The chosen check is inapplicable | Choose the check that actually answers the claim, or return the missing method; an irrelevant test supplies no positive or negative answer. |
| The check cannot currently be performed | Use an adequate existing result or separately permitted alternative if available; otherwise report the unavailable check and dependent action. |
An unavailable mechanism is a fact about checking, not a negative answer about the claimant. A policy may prescribe refusal or deferral when evidence is missing, but that disposition still differs from proof that the claim is false.
ADM.7:4.5 - Bind the result to the actual use
Return the claim, its answer, the material basis and any limitation that changes action. Add enough identity and timing to prevent substitution between check and use. If a payment instruction can change after approval, verify that the provider receives the approved amount and destination under the applicable procedure.
A historical observation cannot establish an indefinitely changing condition. SYSE.28 supplies the engineering question of where a check or enforcement mechanism must act when later changes can defeat it. Use an adequate existing control directly in a case; do not redesign its placement merely because a request arrived.
The consuming person then applies the governing rule or makes the required decision. Keep that decision and subsequent performance separate from the check. Reopen only a result affected by a material changed condition.