DWP learning paths: detailed lesson plan

Design only. Lesson routes are proposed; evidence routes are verified against the local combined corpus. Durations are planning estimates, not observed timings. Each outcome is assessed using the rubric in DESIGN.md.

P01 — Read evidence before trusting an answer

Objective: Build a reproducible claim-to-evidence ledger and stop when the supplied material is insufficient.

Personas: welfare-rights-adviser, pensions-specialist, policy-law-reviewer, evidence-assurance-reviewer, knowledge-engineer, assisted-support. Prerequisites: None. Estimated time: 27 minutes. Steps: 8.

Assessment: Classify an unseen evidence package, verify one claim and reject one unsupported claim. All mandatory boundaries must pass.

1. Baseline and role (3 minutes)

• Outcome: State what success looks like for your role.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Answer three baseline prompts without help; retain them for later comparison.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/evidence-assurance-reviewer.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p01/s01.

2. Distinguish the layers (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Separate original guidance, extracted text and project-authored interpretation.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Classify three items and explain the authority each does and does not have.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: chapter/77, term/dmg-evidence-assessment.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p01/s02.

3. Read the source in context (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Check a paragraph with its heading and continuation.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Capture the locator and a qualification that would be lost in an isolated quotation.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: page/77/0020, page/77/0021.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p01/s03.

4. Use concepts without overclaiming (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish a mention tag, semantic assertion and legal applicability.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Explain why each visible link is or is not enough to support a claim.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/partner.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p01/s04.

5. Separate search, context and answer (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Identify which operation finds records, assembles evidence or generates an answer.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Draw the three stages and name the artefact returned by each.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/knowledge-engineer.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p01/s05.

6. Read insufficiency honestly (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish retained candidates, required evidence and unresolved obligations.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Write three separately defined denominators and identify an omitted requirement.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/calculation.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p01/s06.

7. Make the result accessible (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Explain a result without relying on colour, jargon or pointer-only actions.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Use keyboard navigation and give a plain-English explanation with one source and one gap.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/assisted-support.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p01/s07.

8. Foundation assessment (6 minutes)

• Outcome: Apply the evidence rubric independently.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Submit a claim ledger, a refused unsupported conclusion and a reproducible source identity.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: term/dmg-evidence-assessment.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p01/s08.

P02 — Absence abroad and residence

Objective: Scope absence questions and expose benefit-specific exceptions without making a universal claim.

Personas: welfare-rights-adviser, policy-law-reviewer. Prerequisites: p01. Estimated time: 26 minutes. Steps: 7.

Assessment: Pass a changed-duration or changed-purpose case; explicitly re-evaluate applicability.

1. Set the scope (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Name the missing benefit, jurisdiction, dates and purpose.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Write the minimum clarification questions.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/abroad.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p02/s01.

2. Scope a journey abroad (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish the benefit, destination, duration, purpose and relevant period before selecting evidence.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Create a clarification tree; compare temporary absence, treatment and permanent departure without claiming one universal rule.
• Case references: staff-001.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol2-ch7-part1/0116, page/dmg-vol2-ch7-part6/0008.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p02/s02.

3. Inspect territorial assumptions (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Locate the territorial and temporal scope of a candidate passage.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Annotate what cannot be carried into another jurisdiction.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol2-ch7-part1/0116.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p02/s03.

4. Pension Credit and a move abroad (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Re-scope the general absence question for the named benefit and temporary/permanent distinction.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Create a benefit-specific evidence plan and explain why the general absence result cannot simply be copied.
• Case references: staff-023.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol2-ch7-part6/0008, page/77/0014, page/77/0015.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p02/s04.

5. Read continuations (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Avoid treating the first matching paragraph as the whole rule.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Follow the chapter context and record a remaining source dependency.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: document/dmg-vol2-ch7-part6.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p02/s05.

6. Change a material fact (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Explain why a permanent move cannot inherit a temporary-absence conclusion.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Submit a before/after evidence-requirement table.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/abroad.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p02/s06.

7. Absence assessment (6 minutes)

• Outcome: Give a qualified evidence plan for an unseen absence scenario.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Submit scope, sources, exceptions and an escalation decision.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/policy-law-reviewer.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p02/s07.

P03 — Pension regimes, age and transitions

Objective: Separate age, regime, conditions, claim and payment across State Pension and disability transitions.

Personas: pensions-specialist, policy-law-reviewer. Prerequisites: p01. Estimated time: 31 minutes. Steps: 8.

Assessment: Classify an unseen transition without equating age with entitlement or first payment.

1. Create a regime map (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Separate new State Pension from the legacy regime.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Draw two source branches and list the date needed to choose between them.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/new-state-pension, staff-domain/retirement-pension.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p03/s01.

2. Separate age from first entitlement (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish pensionable age, qualifying conditions, claim and payment dates.
• Practice and submitted evidence: For the supplied birth-date example, mark which date questions the captured table can support and which need further evidence; do not produce an entitlement decision.
• Case references: staff-002.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol12-ch74/0003, page/dmg-vol12-ch74/0068, page/dmg-vol12-ch74/0011, page/dmg-vol12-ch74/0015.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p03/s02.

3. Separate pension regimes and components (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Identify new State Pension, legacy retirement pension and transitional evidence as different scopes.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Produce a regime-and-component map with source-backed prerequisites and an unresolved NI-record boundary.
• Case references: staff-004.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol12-ch74/0001, page/dmg-vol12-ch74/0011, page/dmg-vol12-ch74/0015.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p03/s03.

4. IIDB around pension age (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish IIDB from Reduced Earnings Allowance and related age-dependent questions.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Create a transition table with independent evidence requirements for each named benefit.
• Case references: staff-025.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol11-ch69/0003, page/dmg-vol11-ch71/0117, page/dmg-vol12-ch74/0001, page/dmg-vol3-ch17/0011.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p03/s04.

5. PIP around pension age (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish the treatment of an existing award from a new claim at a different date.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Submit a change-of-facts counterexample and the evidence it requires.
• Case references: staff-032.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol10-ch61/0005, page/dmg-vol12-ch74/0003.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p03/s05.

6. Audit the age table (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Preserve the table heading, band and continuation.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Explain what the table establishes and what it does not establish.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol12-ch74/0068.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p03/s06.

7. Remove the date (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Recognise when an answer becomes unsupported after a date or regime is removed.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Reject or qualify a deliberately under-specified synthetic case.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/pension-age.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p03/s07.

8. Transition assessment (6 minutes)

• Outcome: Present a regime-aware evidence brief.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Submit a timeline separating qualification, claim, award and payment.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/payment.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p03/s08.

P04 — Pension Credit inputs and calculation structure

Objective: Explain Pension Credit assessment dependencies without turning incomplete guidance into an award calculator.

Personas: pensions-specialist, rules-architect, evidence-assurance-reviewer. Prerequisites: p01. Estimated time: 40 minutes. Steps: 10.

Assessment: Submit an input dictionary and dependency graph with typed unknowns, dated parameters and unresolved obligations.

1. Distinguish the decisions (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Separate eligibility, inputs, components and payable amount.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Sketch four boxes and the evidence each requires.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/calculation.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p04/s01.

2. Explain Pension Credit clearly (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Give a plain-English structural explanation while separating source statements from interpretation.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Write a short explanation and an evidence ledger; retain limitations instead of hiding them in a footnote.
• Case references: staff-019.
• Existing source anchors: page/77/0014, page/77/0033, page/77/0035, page/84/0128, page/85/0030.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p04/s02.

3. Trace qualification conditions (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Separate demonstrated conditions from assumptions about facts, dates and regime.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Create a conditions-and-evidence checklist with an explicit cannot-determine outcome.
• Case references: staff-020.
• Existing source anchors: page/77/0014, page/77/0015, page/77/0026, page/77/0033.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p04/s03.

4. Challenge the savings-maximum premise (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish capital, valuation, disregards and income treatment from a single assumed cut-off.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Create a dependency map; label missing conditions rather than returning a universal savings maximum.
• Case references: staff-006.
• Existing source anchors: page/84/0128, page/77/0033, page/77/0014.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p04/s04.

5. Map assessment elements (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Separate an input, an eligibility condition and a calculation parameter.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Classify every proposed threshold and identify the source, period and unresolved dependency.
• Case references: staff-010.
• Existing source anchors: page/77/0014, page/77/0033, page/77/0035, page/84/0128, page/85/0030.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p04/s05.

6. Specify calculation inputs (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Trace proposed inputs to their purpose, evidence and applicability.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Produce an input dictionary that separates unknown, zero, not applicable and not supplied.
• Case references: staff-015.
• Existing source anchors: page/77/0014, page/77/0033, page/77/0035, page/84/0128, page/85/0030.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p04/s06.

7. Describe calculation dependencies (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Represent the structure of a calculation without treating an incomplete source package as an executable formula.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Draw a dependency graph with units, effective periods and unresolved branches; do not calculate an award.
• Case references: staff-016.
• Existing source anchors: page/77/0033, page/77/0035, page/84/0128, page/85/0030.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p04/s07.

8. Separate eligibility from rate (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Keep the qualifying test, component and dated rate as distinct evidence needs.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Prepare a review brief that cannot collapse these three decisions into one lookup.
• Case references: staff-021.
• Existing source anchors: page/77/0014, page/77/0015, page/77/0033, page/77/0059, page/77/0060, page/77/0061, page/77/0062, page/77/0063, page/77/0064, page/77/0065, page/77/0066, page/77/0067, page/77/0068, page/77/0044, page/dmg-memo-02-26-f7835f1e40/0002.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p04/s08.

9. Test a misleading threshold (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Detect a capital example being presented as a universal maximum.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Repair the claim and show the missing valuation or disregard dependency.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: term/capital-valuation, term/capital-disregards.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p04/s09.

10. Calculation-structure assessment (6 minutes)

• Outcome: Explain a complete design with explicit unresolved branches.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Submit the dependency graph and input dictionary; no personal award or production formula.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/rules-architect.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p04/s10.

P05 — Historical rates, additions and ambiguous terms

Objective: Construct a date-bound evidence series and resolve SDA without inventing missing values.

Personas: pensions-specialist, policy-law-reviewer, evidence-assurance-reviewer. Prerequisites: p01. Estimated time: 30 minutes. Steps: 8.

Assessment: Deliver a five-period table with a source for every populated cell, explicit gaps and separate SDA meanings.

1. Define the five-period window (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Turn a relative request into an explicit reproducible period.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Record the as-of date and agree five benefit years; for the demo use 2022/23–2026/27 as a proposed window, subject to available evidence.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/rates.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p05/s01.

2. Resolve SDA before retrieving rates (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Keep Severe Disablement Allowance distinct from the Pension Credit severe-disability addition.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Ask for clarification and build two separately labelled evidence routes; do not choose a meaning silently.
• Case references: staff-008.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol10-ch57/0005, page/78/0011, page/77/0059, page/77/0060, page/77/0061, page/77/0062, page/77/0063, page/77/0064, page/77/0065, page/77/0066, page/77/0067, page/77/0068, page/77/0044, page/dmg-memo-02-26-f7835f1e40/0002.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p05/s02.

3. Build a dated Pension Credit series (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Bind each rate observation to an effective period, component and source version.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Populate a five-period evidence table; explicitly leave unavailable observations blank.
• Case references: staff-007.
• Existing source anchors: page/77/0059, page/77/0060, page/77/0061, page/77/0062, page/77/0063, page/77/0064, page/77/0065, page/77/0066, page/77/0067, page/77/0068, page/77/0044, page/dmg-memo-02-26-f7835f1e40/0002.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p05/s03.

4. Additional amounts over time (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish separate additional amounts and their qualifying conditions in a dated comparison.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Create a component-by-period matrix; record both missing rates and missing qualifications.
• Case references: staff-009.
• Existing source anchors: page/78/0008, page/78/0011, page/78/0027, page/77/0059, page/77/0060, page/77/0061, page/77/0062, page/77/0063, page/77/0064, page/77/0065, page/77/0066, page/77/0067, page/77/0068, page/77/0044, page/dmg-memo-02-26-f7835f1e40/0002.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p05/s04.

5. Separate effective and capture dates (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Identify which date governs a rate observation.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Label a source date, effective period and acquisition date separately.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: page/77/0064.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p05/s05.

6. Keep missing observations missing (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Avoid filling an absent year from memory or interpolation.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Add a gap row and a source acquisition requirement.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-memo-02-26-f7835f1e40/0002.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p05/s06.

7. Test a mislabelled amount (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Detect an amount assigned to the wrong component or period.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Correct a deliberately relabelled table cell and explain the evidence.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/severe-disability-addition, staff-domain/sda.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p05/s07.

8. Rates assessment (6 minutes)

• Outcome: Produce an auditable historical comparison.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Submit the table, terminology decision, gaps and provenance; never substitute a present rate.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/rates.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p05/s08.

P06 — Partners, household and care-home changes

Objective: Preserve household qualifications and distinguish permanence, funding and components when reviewing care-home questions.

Personas: welfare-rights-adviser, pensions-specialist, evidence-assurance-reviewer. Prerequisites: p01. Estimated time: 38 minutes. Steps: 10.

Assessment: Pass a new household/funding variant and identify omitted qualifications in a plausible answer.

1. Model the facts (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish partner status, household membership, permanence and funding.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Create a synthetic fact matrix without claimant identifiers.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/partner, staff-domain/care-home.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p06/s01.

2. Identify relevant partner facts (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish partner, couple, household membership and a person merely sharing accommodation.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Build a fact-to-definition table and flag any missing facts before proposing an interpretation.
• Case references: staff-014.
• Existing source anchors: page/77/0015, page/77/0020, page/77/0026, page/84/0128, page/77/0033.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p06/s02.

3. Test the partner comparison (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Explain how a partner scenario changes the evidence needed rather than just changing a numeric amount.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Compare synthetic single and couple fact patterns while keeping all other facts constant.
• Case references: staff-017.
• Existing source anchors: page/77/0015, page/77/0020, page/77/0026, page/84/0128, page/77/0033.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p06/s03.

4. Self-funded permanent care (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Retain partner and household qualifications while examining a self-funded scenario.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Write a qualified evidence note with headings, continuations and household assumptions visible.
• Case references: staff-012.
• Existing source anchors: page/78/0025, page/78/0058, page/77/0020.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p06/s04.

5. Publicly funded permanent care (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Show why changing funding does not remove the need to check household and component rules.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Compare with the self-funded scenario; annotate every changed fact and unresolved dependency.
• Case references: staff-013.
• Existing source anchors: page/78/0025, page/78/0058, page/77/0020.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p06/s05.

6. Challenge all care-home scenarios (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Define a bounded scenario space and identify what an all-scenarios claim would require.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Submit a matrix of permanence, funding, partner/household and component distinctions, with uncovered cells.
• Case references: staff-018.
• Existing source anchors: page/78/0025, page/77/0020, page/77/0026, page/78/0058.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p06/s06.

7. Read the qualifying heading (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Detect a source heading that limits a quoted proposition.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Annotate the heading and continuation before accepting a claim.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: page/78/0025, page/77/0020.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p06/s07.

8. Check ignored-person dependencies (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Recognise why sharing accommodation alone may not settle a disability-addition question.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Record normal-residence, ignored-person and partner dependencies still needing review.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/severe-disability-ignored-persons, staff-domain/severe-disability-normal-residence.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p06/s08.

9. Review a plausible AI answer (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Find a material omission despite an exact quotation.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Mark the unsupported inference and rewrite it with the missing condition visible.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/household-separation.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p06/s09.

10. Household assessment (6 minutes)

• Outcome: Explain changed evidence needs after a material fact changes.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Submit the scenario matrix and an independent critique of a new answer.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/pensions-specialist.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p06/s10.

P07 — Directed benefit interactions and disability transitions

Objective: Distinguish qualification, income treatment, overlap, passporting and transition for named benefit variants.

Personas: welfare-rights-adviser, evidence-assurance-reviewer, policy-law-reviewer. Prerequisites: p01. Estimated time: 79 minutes. Steps: 20.

Assessment: Pass a changed-variant and reversed-edge case; reproduce the duplicate question package exactly.

1. Classify an interaction (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Name the relation before evaluating whether it is supported.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Define five relation types in plain English and give a non-example of each.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/overlap.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s01.

2. Draw directed edges (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Keep source, target, component and regime explicit.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Demonstrate why an A-to-B relation cannot simply be reversed.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: term/dmg-overlapping-benefits.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s02.

3. State Pension and PIP (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish separate qualification from an assumed payment offset.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Draw a directed interaction with explicit component, period and unresolved evidence.
• Case references: staff-003.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol12-ch74/0001, page/dmg-vol10-ch61/0005, page/dmg-vol3-ch17/0011.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s03.

4. Other benefits alongside State Pension (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Separate possible additional support from established entitlement.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Make a candidate-benefit matrix with a qualifying-condition column; reject automatic passporting.
• Case references: staff-005.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol12-ch74/0001, page/77/0014, page/85/0030, page/dmg-vol10-ch61/0005, page/dmg-vol10-ch60/0003.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s04.

5. Housing Benefit and Pension Credit (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish income treatment, housing costs and passporting direction.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Draw separate candidate relationships and identify what evidence is needed for each.
• Case references: staff-011.
• Existing source anchors: page/85/0077, page/78/0058, page/77/0015.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s05.

6. State Pension within Pension Credit research (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish receipt of one benefit from qualification for another and the treatment of income.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Prepare a directed interaction note with an explicit counterexample to automatic entitlement.
• Case references: staff-022.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol12-ch74/0001, page/77/0014, page/85/0030, page/77/0033.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s06.

7. Additional support with IIDB (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Separate IIDB qualification, supplements and other benefit conditions.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Build a candidate-support map; mark every unproven dependency.
• Case references: staff-024.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol11-ch69/0003, page/dmg-vol11-ch69/0042, page/dmg-vol10-ch60/0004, page/85/0030.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s07.

8. Child DLA to PIP: first occurrence (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish age-related transition, an existing award, a new claim and relevant dates.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Capture the exact governed input tuple and an unresolved transition checklist for later replay.
• Case references: staff-026.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol10-ch61/0005.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s08.

9. IIDB and JSA variants (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Separate income-based, contributory and New Style JSA before discussing interactions.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Compare three variant-specific evidence plans; reject a single unqualified yes/no answer.
• Case references: staff-027.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol11-ch69/0003, page/dmg-vol3-ch17/0011, page/85/0030.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s09.

10. IIDB and ESA variants (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Separate income-related, contributory and New Style ESA before discussing interactions.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Build a variant matrix that identifies missing overlap and income-treatment evidence.
• Case references: staff-028.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol11-ch69/0003, page/dmg-vol3-ch17/0011, page/85/0030.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s10.

11. IIDB and disability benefit families (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish benefit-level associations from component-specific payment rules.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Make a directed component map for IIDB, PIP, Attendance Allowance and DLA with provenance.
• Case references: staff-029.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol11-ch69/0003, page/dmg-vol11-ch69/0042, page/dmg-vol10-ch61/0005, page/dmg-vol3-ch17/0011.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s11.

12. IIDB and PIP in detail (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Explain why a related-benefit link does not prove the rule for concurrent payment.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Audit one candidate relationship against its cited source and list unresolved qualifications.
• Case references: staff-030.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol11-ch69/0003, page/dmg-vol11-ch69/0042, page/dmg-vol3-ch17/0011.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s12.

13. Additional support associated with PIP (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Separate a possible qualifying benefit from automatic entitlement to a supplement.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Prepare a conditions-first discovery matrix with daily-living and mobility components distinguished.
• Case references: staff-031.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol10-ch61/0005, page/dmg-vol10-ch60/0004, page/78/0011.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s13.

14. Child DLA to PIP: replay occurrence (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Recognise the duplicate wording and reproduce governed evidence under identical inputs.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Replay staff-026 with the same version and budget; compare evidence identity, not merely answer wording.
• Case references: staff-033.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol10-ch61/0005.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s14.

15. PIP and JSA variants (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Separate the PIP component from the JSA regime and proposed interaction.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Submit a variant-specific directed map and a negative control changing the JSA regime.
• Case references: staff-034.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol10-ch61/0005, page/dmg-vol3-ch17/0011, page/dmg-vol10-ch60/0004.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s15.

16. PIP and ESA variants (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Separate the PIP component from the ESA regime and proposed interaction.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Show which evidence is shared and which must be re-established after an ESA-variant change.
• Case references: staff-035.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol10-ch61/0005, page/dmg-vol3-ch17/0011, page/dmg-vol10-ch60/0004.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s16.

17. PIP, Attendance Allowance and DLA (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish age, component, transition and overlap questions.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Produce a comparison with no assumed symmetric equivalence between these benefits.
• Case references: staff-036.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol10-ch61/0005, page/dmg-vol3-ch17/0011.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s17.

18. War pensions and constant attendance (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Keep War Pensions Constant Attendance Allowance separate from the industrial injuries allowance.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Resolve the terminology, scope the requested variations and record missing rates or overlap rules instead of adding payments.
• Case references: staff-037.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol3-ch17/0011, page/dmg-vol11-ch69/0042.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s18.

19. Counterexample round (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Detect a variant swap and an invalid symmetric inference.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Correct both errors and identify the evidence to reacquire.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/esa-new-style, staff-domain/jsa-income-based.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s19.

20. Interaction assessment (6 minutes)

• Outcome: Produce a bounded directed interaction map.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Submit two variant-specific maps, duplicate-replay identities and unresolved conditions.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/evidence-assurance-reviewer.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p07/s20.

P08 — Caring conditions and effects on others

Objective: Separate caring conditions, qualifying payments and interactions without assuming multiple awards.

Personas: welfare-rights-adviser, evidence-assurance-reviewer. Prerequisites: p01. Estimated time: 27 minutes. Steps: 7.

Assessment: Reject a doubled-payment inference and distinguish effects on the carer from effects on another person.

1. Distinguish the people and payments (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Separate carer, cared-for person, Carer’s Allowance and a carer additional amount.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Draw a labelled people-and-payments diagram.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/carers-allowance, staff-domain/carer-addition.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p08/s01.

2. Caring qualification (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Identify source-backed caring conditions separately from evidence that they are met.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Build a conditions-to-evidence checklist using only synthetic facts.
• Case references: staff-038.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol10-ch60/0003, page/dmg-vol10-ch60/0004.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p08/s02.

3. Caring interactions (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish Carer’s Allowance from a Pension Credit carer addition and impacts on another person.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Draw directed claimant/carer/other-person effects and test an unsupported symmetry claim.
• Case references: staff-039.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol10-ch60/0003, page/dmg-vol10-ch60/0004, page/78/0027, page/78/0011, page/dmg-vol3-ch17/0011.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p08/s03.

4. Caring for several people (4 minutes)

• Outcome: Avoid inferring multiple payments from multiple caring responsibilities.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Compare one-person and two-person synthetic scenarios and justify every proposed change or non-conclusion.
• Case references: staff-040.
• Existing source anchors: page/dmg-vol10-ch60/0007, page/dmg-vol10-ch60/0003, page/dmg-vol10-ch60/0004.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p08/s04.

5. Evidence of caring (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish a condition from evidence that a synthetic case meets it.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Create an evidence checklist and identify unknown facts.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: term/ca-care-statement-evidence.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p08/s05.

6. Change the qualifying payment (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Re-evaluate dependencies when one relevant fact changes.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Record which conclusions must be withdrawn or rechecked.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: term/ca-qualifying-disability-payment.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p08/s06.

7. Caring assessment (6 minutes)

• Outcome: Give a supported scope statement and a safe next step.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Submit the directed map, source locators and unresolved evidence.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/welfare-rights-adviser.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p08/s07.

P09 — Test whether OKF improves the AI demonstration

Objective: Measure token use and evidence quality fairly without presuming the desired result.

Personas: knowledge-engineer, evidence-assurance-reviewer, policy-law-reviewer. Prerequisites: p01, p06. Estimated time: 27 minutes. Steps: 8.

Assessment: Publish a paired experiment with complete accounting, blinded claim assessment and failed runs retained.

1. State a falsifiable hypothesis (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Separate token economy from answer quality.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Pre-register success thresholds and explicitly allow no improvement or worse results.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/knowledge-engineer.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p09/s01.

2. Freeze the experiment (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Keep model, settings, question, source version and output budget comparable.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Create the input manifest and record unavoidable differences between conditions.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/knowledge-engineer.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p09/s02.

3. Choose representative cases (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Cover ambiguity, dates, interactions and household qualification.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Select staff-002, 006, 008, 012, 026 and 033 plus an unknown-term control.
• Case references: staff-002, staff-006, staff-008, staff-012, staff-026, staff-033.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/partner.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p09/s03.

4. Define the controls (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish raw-source versus OKF evidence from a no-evidence control.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Prepare equal-source A/B packages; retain no-evidence as a separate diagnostic, not the fair baseline.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: term/dmg-evidence-assessment.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p09/s04.

5. Measure all the costs (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Count prompts, tool returns, retries, output and amortised preparation separately.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Submit totals, latency and failure rates for repeated runs, with unavailable provider fields labelled.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/knowledge-engineer.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p09/s05.

6. Review claims independently (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Separate citation match from correctness, qualifications and completeness.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Blind the treatment labels and score claims against the same frozen evidence.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/policy-law-reviewer.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p09/s06.

7. Replay and disclose (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Retain exact identities and explain failures or ties.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Replay the duplicate and unknown control; retain raw results and exclusions.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/evidence-assurance-reviewer.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p09/s07.

8. Comparison assessment (6 minutes)

• Outcome: Make only conclusions supported by the experiment.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Submit a paired results table, variability, limitations and a reproducibility manifest.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/evidence-assurance-reviewer.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p09/s08.

P10 — Design an accessible Pension Credit application journey

Objective: Map an official form and its notes to a synthetic, accessible application flow without equating data collection with entitlement.

Personas: applicant-change-reporter, assisted-support, knowledge-engineer, pensions-specialist. Prerequisites: p01, p04, p06. Estimated time: 27 minutes. Steps: 8.

Assessment: Submit a versioned field map and a keyboard-complete synthetic journey, with missing form evidence explicitly blocked.

1. Set the application boundary (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Separate a demonstration submission from an official claim.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Write the opening and confirmation copy; use fictional data and a local demo receipt.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/applicant-change-reporter.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p10/s01.

2. Acquire the form family (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Pin PC1, PC1 notes and PC1H as separate source artefacts.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Record publication version, original URLs, hashes, page locators and extraction checks.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/calculation.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p10/s02.

3. Trace each field (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Link collected data to an exact form question and purpose.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Build the form-question to field to validation to conditional-routing matrix.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/calculation.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p10/s03.

4. Represent uncertainty (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Keep unknown, empty, zero and not applicable distinct.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Create synthetic missing-data cases and explain what the user should do next.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/eligibility.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p10/s04.

5. Model household branches (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Use validated form conditions to design household and care branches.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Trace two fictional journeys without deriving branches solely from benefit mention tags.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/partner, staff-domain/care-home.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p10/s05.

6. Prototype with CASA (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Choose and pin a tested CASA package and accessible components.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Retain package identity, route tests, labels, error summary and keyboard results.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/knowledge-engineer.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p10/s06.

7. Check answers and corrections (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Let a person inspect and change every answer before submission.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Demonstrate correction, cancellation and recovery with consistent state.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/assisted-support.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p10/s07.

8. Application-design assessment (6 minutes)

• Outcome: Prove field provenance and accessible completion.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Submit the field map, recordings and fictional receipt; block release if required source fields remain unverified.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/applicant-change-reporter.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p10/s08.

P11 — Demonstrate a trustworthy agent-assisted application

Objective: Demonstrate callable browser tools that share validation and user control with the human application flow.

Personas: knowledge-engineer, assisted-support, evidence-assurance-reviewer. Prerequisites: p10. Estimated time: 27 minutes. Steps: 8.

Assessment: Complete the same synthetic case through both routes, prove result parity, consent and failure recovery.

1. Verify the host capability (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish tool registration from callable WebMCP in the actual host.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Record browser, host, API and one successful observed discovery/invocation; otherwise label the path blocked.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/knowledge-engineer.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p11/s01.

2. Specify a small tool surface (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Define inspect, update, validate, review and submit operations with clear boundaries.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Write input/output contracts and state which operations mutate draft or submitted state.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/rules-architect.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p11/s02.

3. Share the validation (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Apply the same rules and state to human and tool-driven entry.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Submit the same invalid and valid values through both routes and compare outcomes.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/knowledge-engineer.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p11/s03.

4. Keep the person in control (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Bind confirmation to the exact reviewed application state.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Show a changed answer invalidating earlier confirmation; do not treat conversation text as blanket submission authority.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/assisted-support.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p11/s04.

5. Test cancellation and retry (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Prevent duplicate submission and support recoverable tool failure.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Demonstrate a cancelled request, retry and one fictional receipt with a stable submission identity.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/evidence-assurance-reviewer.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p11/s05.

6. Treat content as data (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Ignore instructions embedded in retrieved guidance or field content.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Run an inert injection fixture and show that it cannot alter permissions or submission policy.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/knowledge-engineer.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p11/s06.

7. Measure parity and cost (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Compare the same completed application through human and agent routes.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Report correctness, recovery, calls, tokens and elapsed time without assuming the agent route wins.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/evidence-assurance-reviewer.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p11/s07.

8. Agent-assistance assessment (6 minutes)

• Outcome: Prove callable capability, parity and informed confirmation.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Submit invocation evidence, a human-route comparison and failed-case logs; provide an honest non-WebMCP fallback if unavailable.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/assisted-support.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p11/s08.

P12 — From evidence to a reviewable rules prototype

Objective: Separate evidence, propositions, reviewed rules and executable tests; block incomplete or unreviewed rules from award decisions.

Personas: rules-architect, policy-law-reviewer, evidence-assurance-reviewer. Prerequisites: p04, p05, p06, p07, p09. Estimated time: 33 minutes. Steps: 10.

Assessment: Deliver a non-operational rule specification, traceability and counterexample tests with explicit promotion blockers.

1. Challenge definitive-bundle assumptions (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Explain why a captured guide is not a complete executable legal specification.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Inventory temporal, statutory, exception and source gaps before defining a rule.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/rules-architect.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p12/s01.

2. Choose one bounded rule family (3 minutes)

• Outcome: State a small scope and exclude unsupported regimes.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Propose a Pension Credit input-validation or evidence-routing rule, not a full award calculator.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/calculation.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p12/s02.

3. Extract a proposition (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Retain conditions, negation, exceptions and source context.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Write one candidate proposition and link it to exact source passages.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: term/dmg-evidence-assessment.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p12/s03.

4. Record the interpretation (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Distinguish a source proposition from a model-proposed rule.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Produce a reviewer decision record with disagreements and unresolved points.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/policy-law-reviewer.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p12/s04.

5. Type inputs and outputs (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Represent dates, units and unknowns explicitly.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Create a typed decision table with indeterminate and out-of-scope outputs.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/calculation.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p12/s05.

6. Model dates and dependencies (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Bind rule variants to effective periods and complete support dependencies.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Show that removing an exception or applicable date blocks evaluation.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/rates.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p12/s06.

7. Create synthetic boundary cases (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Test neighbouring values and changed material facts.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Submit positive, negative, missing-data, out-of-period and contradictory-evidence cases.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: staff-domain/partner.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p12/s07.

8. Compare with independent review (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Avoid using the generating model as its own correctness oracle.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Have a designated reviewer check traceability and expected outcomes; keep specialist approval pending where unavailable.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/evidence-assurance-reviewer.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p12/s08.

9. Design the promotion gate (3 minutes)

• Outcome: Prevent unreviewed rules becoming a public entitlement service.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Specify owner approval, legal validation, provenance, tests, rollback and monitoring before any operational use.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/policy-law-reviewer.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p12/s09.

10. Rules-capstone assessment (6 minutes)

• Outcome: Demonstrate a transparent non-operational prototype.
• Practice and submitted evidence: Submit the rule pack and a blocked case; no award, real claimant decision or claim of complete legal coverage.
• Case references: Cross-cutting demonstration activity.
• Existing source anchors: persona/rules-architect.
• Proposed lesson record: learning/p12/s10.