The guidance never caught up with you.
You carry the decisions this system makes. You already work as though the workplace matters, because you have watched it decide cases. Nothing published backs you up when a file needs it to. This page sets out what exists for you to use now, and what is being built to close that gap.
You are working ahead of your own field.
Disability is biopsychosocial. The workplace, the supervisor, and team-level psychological safety shape recovery alongside the diagnosis. You know that from the files. What you do not have is anything public that says it back to you.
Fitness is assessed through a medical lens, and the workplace being returned to is not assessed at all.
The evidence on what helps is scattered across hundreds of studies, and is rarely at hand in the hour you need it.
There is no published standard to point to when a file needs one, and no shared language for what good looks like.
The evidence, organized the way you would need it.
The evidence area is arranged around claims rather than around documents, so you can trace a position to its sources without reading a literature review first. It is free, and it carries a CC BY-SA licence, which means you can use it in your own work as long as you credit it and pass the same freedom on.
The Supervisor Conversation Kit and the Worker Guide sit alongside it. Both are v1 drafts still in revision, and they say so on the page rather than presenting as finished.
What is being built, and what is not built yet.
Standing gets earned first and authority claimed second, in that order. You are exactly the reader who would notice if it went the other way, so here is the real state of each one.
- In drafting
A minimal standard, version one
The keystone, and the thing you have been missing. Its original three-month timeline has been extended to allow for technical and independent review.
- Not started
A tribunal and case-law watch
So decisions that change your practice are visible when they land rather than months later.
- Not started
An annual state-of-the-field report
Never sponsored.
- Not started
A lived-experience advisory panel
Run on aggregate data only. No one is asked to retell their story to be believed.
Three of these four do not exist yet. Saying so is the point, and each state changes on this page when it changes in fact.
Independence, and how it is enforced.
A body that both advises an organization and assesses it is not independent, whatever it says about itself. You have seen that from the inside. The rule here is a conflict-of-interest firewall: a person affiliated with an organization does not both advise and assess that organization, per person and per engagement.
That policy is published as a page rather than described in a sentence, because an independence claim is only as good as the document behind it. Certifying individuals is the revenue model under consideration precisely because certifying a person carries no issuer-pays conflict. Any organizational seal waits behind the firewall and behind an independent-review requirement in the by-law.
Use what is here, and hold us to the rest.
The evidence and the tools are free and public. The standard is not written yet, and this page will keep saying so until it is.
This page is one of five