Understanding Case Concern Levels and Risk Assessment

Concern levels provide a simple but powerful way to prioritise your caseload, ensuring that the most vulnerable individuals receive appropriate attention. When resources are limited, clear prioritisation helps case workers and managers make good decisions about where to focus.

What you'll learn: How concern levels work and why they're essential for effective caseload management.

Practical guidance: When to use each level and how to make consistent assessments.

Implementation: How to use concern levels effectively in your organisation.

What Are Concern Levels?

Concern levels are indicators that reflect the current level of risk, urgency, or need associated with a case, helping teams prioritise their work.

Simple Classification: Most systems, including Plinth, use a three-tier system: Low, Medium, and High concern.

Visual Coding: Levels are typically colour-coded (green, amber/orange, red) for quick visual identification across the caseload.

Dynamic Assessment: Concern levels should change as circumstances change – they reflect current status, not a permanent classification.

Professional Judgment: While guidelines help with consistency, setting concern levels requires professional judgment about the specific situation.

Concern levels transform case lists into prioritised work queues, enabling better allocation of limited time and resources.

The Three Concern Levels

Each concern level indicates a different priority and typically implies different response expectations.

Low Concern (Green)

Cases that are progressing well or involve relatively stable situations.

Characteristics: The individual's situation is stable, support is progressing as planned, no significant risks are identified, and regular contact is being maintained.

Typical Response: Standard contact frequency according to support plans, routine monitoring, no special measures required.

When to Use: Most cases should be at low concern most of the time – it's the baseline for cases receiving appropriate support.

Escalation Triggers: Watch for changes that might indicate a need to increase concern level.

Low concern doesn't mean no concern – it means the situation is being managed appropriately within normal parameters.

Medium Concern (Amber/Orange)

Cases requiring increased attention due to emerging issues or identified risks.

Characteristics: Some risk factors are present, the situation is showing signs of instability, progress has stalled, or circumstances have changed in ways that need monitoring.

Typical Response: Increased contact frequency, closer monitoring, discussion in supervision, possible review of support approach.

When to Use: When you're worried about a case but not at crisis point – the situation needs watching and possibly intervention.

Escalation Triggers: Define what would move this case to high concern and watch for those signs.

Medium concern is the "watching brief" level – attention is heightened, but crisis response isn't yet needed.

High Concern (Red)

Cases requiring urgent attention due to significant risk or crisis.

Characteristics: Significant risk is identified, the individual is in crisis, there are safeguarding concerns, or the situation requires immediate action.

Typical Response: Priority attention, immediate action where needed, discussion with supervisor, possible multi-agency involvement.

When to Use: When there's a genuine need for urgent response – overuse dilutes the signal.

De-Escalation: High concern shouldn't be permanent – as crises resolve, consider whether the level should reduce.

High concern is a flag for urgent attention – reserving it for genuine urgency ensures it remains meaningful.

Setting Concern Levels

Consistent concern level assignment requires clear criteria and good professional judgment.

Factors to Consider

Multiple factors may influence concern level assessment.

Immediate Risk: Is there risk of immediate harm to the individual or others? This is often the most important factor.

Vulnerability Factors: What vulnerabilities exist that might make the situation more serious? Consider age, health, support networks, previous history.

Stability: Is the situation stable, deteriorating, or improving? Recent changes may indicate changing risk.

Engagement: Is the individual engaging with support? Disengagement can be a risk factor, particularly for those with significant needs.

External Factors: Are there external factors affecting risk, such as housing instability, relationship breakdown, or health changes?

Multiple factors combine to inform concern level – rarely is it determined by a single consideration.

Avoiding Common Pitfalls

Be aware of tendencies that can undermine effective concern level use.

Concern Creep: Avoid gradually elevating concern levels without clear justification – if most cases are medium or high, the system loses meaning.

Reluctance to Downgrade: Don't leave concern levels elevated after situations improve – accurate levels require both escalation and de-escalation.

Inconsistency: Different workers setting very different levels for similar situations undermines team coordination – discuss calibration in supervision.

Over-Reliance on History: Previous high concern doesn't mean permanent high concern – assess current circumstances.

Underestimating Quiet Cases: Long periods without contact may indicate disengagement rather than stability – investigate before assuming all is well.

Effective use requires active management of concern levels, not just setting and forgetting.

Documentation

Document the reasoning behind concern level decisions.

Note the Change: When changing concern levels, record what prompted the change.

Explain the Assessment: Briefly note the key factors informing your assessment.

Review Decisions: Document when concern levels have been reviewed and maintained, not just when they change.

Supervision Records: Important concern level decisions should be discussed and documented in supervision.

Good documentation supports accountability and helps others understand your reasoning.

Using Concern Levels Effectively

Concern levels are most valuable when actively used in day-to-day work and team management.

Prioritising Daily Work

Let concern levels guide how you allocate your time.

Start with High: Address high concern cases first each day – they need the most urgent attention.

Then Medium: Ensure medium concern cases receive the additional attention they need.

Don't Neglect Low: Low concern cases still need regular contact – schedule this appropriately.

Adjust for Capacity: On days with limited capacity, focus on higher concern levels; on fuller days, ensure low concern cases also receive attention.

Concern levels provide a ready-made prioritisation system for managing competing demands.

Team-Level Overview

Managers should monitor concern levels across the team.

Distribution Review: Regularly review the distribution of concern levels across the team – are patterns appropriate?

Workload Implications: A worker with many high concern cases may need support or workload adjustment.

Comparison: Consider whether similar cases are rated consistently across different workers.

Trends: Watch for trends in concern levels – increasing high concern might indicate systemic issues.

Team-level monitoring ensures individual assessments aggregate into appropriate organisational awareness.

Supervision Focus

Concern levels should inform supervision discussions.

High Concern Priority: Always discuss high concern cases in supervision – these need management oversight.

Medium Concern Review: Regularly review medium concern cases – what's the plan for each?

Low Concern Sampling: Periodically review a sample of low concern cases – are they accurately assessed?

Calibration Discussions: Use supervision to calibrate understanding of concern levels across the team.

Supervision provides the quality assurance that makes concern levels meaningful.

Plinth's Concern Level Features

Plinth provides integrated concern level tracking throughout the case management system.

Setting and Updating Levels

Concern levels are easy to set and change in Plinth.

At Case Creation: Set an initial concern level when creating a new case based on your initial assessment.

From Notes: Update concern levels directly when adding notes, capturing assessment changes at the point of documentation.

Direct Edit: Update concern levels from the case view at any time as your assessment changes.

History Preserved: The system maintains a record of concern level changes over time.

Integrated updating makes concern level management part of normal workflow rather than a separate administrative task.

Visual Indicators

Concern levels are visible throughout the system for quick identification.

Colour Coding: Low (green), Medium (orange), and High (red) appear as coloured badges throughout the interface.

Case Lists: Concern levels display in case tables, enabling quick scanning of the caseload.

Case Cards: Individual case views prominently display current concern level.

Sorting and Filtering: Filter case views by concern level to focus on specific priorities.

Consistent visual display ensures concern levels are always visible when making decisions about priorities.

Supervision Support

Concern levels integrate with supervision workflows.

Summary Sorting: Weekly summaries are automatically sorted by concern level, ensuring high priority cases are reviewed first.

AI Analysis: AI-powered case analysis can help identify cases where concern level might need review.

Bulk Review: Quickly review concern levels across the caseload to prepare for supervision or team meetings.

Tools support the human judgment that makes concern levels effective.

Frequently Asked Questions

How often should concern levels be reviewed?

Review should be an ongoing process, not a periodic exercise.

At Every Contact: Consider whether the concern level remains appropriate after every significant interaction.

Minimum Review: Even for cases with less frequent contact, review concern levels at least monthly.

Supervision Review: Discuss concern levels systematically in regular supervision.

Triggered Review: Review immediately when you learn of significant changes in circumstances.

Concern levels should reflect current assessment – stale ratings undermine the system.

Who should set concern levels?

The case worker is typically best placed, with supervisor oversight.

Case Worker Assessment: The worker with most knowledge of the case is usually best placed to assess concern level.

Supervisor Oversight: Supervisors should review and may challenge concern level assessments, particularly for high concern cases.

Escalation Authority: Define who can escalate to high concern and whether supervisor agreement is required.

Team Discussion: Complex cases may benefit from team discussion to inform concern level decisions.

Clear accountability ensures concern levels are actively managed rather than defaulted.

What if colleagues disagree about a concern level?

Disagreement is an opportunity for discussion and learning.

Discuss the Specifics: Understand what's driving different assessments – often people are weighing factors differently.

Focus on Criteria: Refer to agreed criteria or definitions rather than arguing abstract positions.

Manager Decision: If agreement can't be reached, a manager may need to make the final determination.

Learn From It: Use disagreements to refine shared understanding and calibrate the team.

Disagreement handled well improves consistency; handled poorly it creates confusion.

Can we use more than three levels?

Three levels usually provide the right balance of simplicity and differentiation.

Simplicity Matters: More levels add cognitive load and make quick prioritisation harder.

Three Is Standard: Most organisations find Low/Medium/High provides adequate differentiation.

Additional Flags: If you need more nuance, consider additional flags (like "under formal review") rather than more levels.

Workflow Variation: Different workflows might use concern levels differently while keeping the same three levels.

Resist the temptation to add complexity – three well-used levels are better than five poorly-defined ones.

Recommended Next Pages

• The Complete Guide to Case Management – Comprehensive coverage of case management principles and features.

• Case Management Best Practices for Nonprofits – Expert recommendations for effective case management.

• Managing Case Status: Open, Paused, and Closed – When and how to transition cases.

• AI-Powered Case Analysis and Summaries – Using AI to support prioritisation and review.

Last updated: August 2025

For more information about concern levels and risk assessment, contact our team or schedule a demo.