Guide
What evidence should a practice prepare for a comprehensive BSP review?
In short: Prepare an evidence index that lets the reviewing practitioner find the current plan, relevant assessments, implementation information, feedback and the record of decisions. Keep the review outcome and its rationale traceable. A date or a revised file alone does not show what was considered. The suggested structure below supports preparation; it does not replace a practitioner’s review or the participant’s involvement.
Prepare the review evidence before marking the task complete
A useful preparation check asks whether the practitioner can locate the information needed for this person's review. It also shows what is missing and who is following it up. Start with the current plan and keep the source of each item identifiable.
The Commission's May 2026 monitoring and review guidance describes ongoing monitoring and a substantive, evidence-informed review. It calls for consultation with the person and relevant others, consideration of implementation and outcomes, and documentation of the sources, outcome and reasons for decisions. Administrative changes alone do not establish that a review occurred.
For comprehensive plans containing regulated restrictive practices, section 22 of the Behaviour Support Rules sets annual and change-of-circumstances review duties. The deadline guide addresses those dates; this page focuses on preparing the evidence.
An evidence index the reviewer can use
This is a suggested organisational structure, not an official Commission checklist. The practitioner decides what is relevant, sufficient and current for the person's circumstances.
| Evidence area | A practical question for preparation | Reference to retain |
|---|---|---|
| Current plan | Which version is being reviewed? | Plan and relevant date references |
| Assessment information | Which existing or further assessments need consideration? | Relevant source or outstanding assessment request |
| Person's perspective | How will the person's views be available to the reviewer? | Agreed accessible consultation record |
| Implementation | What information has come back from each relevant implementing team? | Relevant feedback and data references |
| Changes and concerns | Which questions require the practitioner's attention? | Source of the concern and follow-up contact |
| Review decisions | What was decided and why? | Dated review record and resulting actions |
Record whether an item is received, awaiting clarification or reviewed. Those labels answer different questions. When a file is linked, check that the intended reviewer can access the relevant record through the agreed authorised process.
A fictional preparation example
A practice is preparing a comprehensive-plan review. The administrator can find the current BSP and feedback from one implementing team, but another team's response is outstanding. A consultation record is available for the practitioner to consider. The team has not yet established whether the missing response affects the review's next steps.
The preparation record keeps the missing response visible, names the contact following it up and identifies when the practitioner will consider the issue. It does not convert an unanswered question into “no concerns”.
After the practitioner completes the review, the record identifies the information considered, the decision, its rationale and any resulting tasks. The example illustrates an evidence trail; it does not decide whether that fictional plan should change, whether the evidence was sufficient or whether a legal duty has been met.
Keep the review and the next actions connected
Use the outcome to identify who needs to do what next. If a revised plan or further clarification is required, retain the relevant reference and the person following up. Keep clinical decisions, communications with implementers and official submissions identifiable as separate work.
For the external handover, use the implementing-provider checklist. For a restrictive-practice decision or expiry question, use the authorisation record guide. A completed internal task does not itself establish receipt, training or authorisation.
Reviewing the practice's recorded information in NDPRO
NDPRO helps behaviour support practices review recorded BSP dates and milestones alongside linked restrictive-practice information. Its PBSP-QA workflow is another available part of the product; see the separate PBSP-QA guide for that specific tool and its scope. A quality-assessment result is one input, not the complete review or a substitute for clinical judgment.
In a 30-minute walkthrough, ask to see the fictional participant's plan dates, milestone status and relevant linked records. Compare the view with your preparation index and establish how your team will retrieve the underlying review evidence. Use the agreed practice process to gather external feedback and retain the underlying evidence; the practitioner remains responsible for the clinical review.
NDPRO works standalone, with an optional Splose connection. The reviewing practitioner and responsible providers retain their decisions and required official actions.
Book a 30-minute NDPRO walkthrough.
Sources reviewed 21 October 2026: the May monitoring/review guidance and section 22 linked above.