Common Problems with Written Evaluation Reports

-Written only to show need for OT rather than to help team to better understand and work with the student

 

-Difficult for parents and other non-OTs to understand

 

-Lots of information on test scores and ‘performance components’ and not enough information on how these impact school participation

 

-Test scores reported in raw scores or age equivalents misleading the reader

 

-Reason for referral not always determined or identified

 

-Input from teacher, parent and student not included

 

-Relevant history not considered – especially for outside evaluations recommending services without consideration of the student having already received OT

 

-Lack of a contextual, school-based observation

 

-Lack of analysis and interpretation

 

-Lack of explicit recommendations and strategies to address identified needs

 

-Including specific (e.g. 1x30 in class OT) recommendations prior to determining eligibility and prior to team process

 

“Dos” for Written Reports

-Identify and address reason for referral

 

-Describe behaviors – what you observed (avoid subjective or judgmental language)

 

-Define abbreviations, use formal language, spell check, edit!

 

-Use standard scores or percentiles when reporting standardized test results (avoid raw scores and age equivalents)

 

-Include interpretation/analysis of findings

 

-Relate findings to school participation

 

-Provide information to assist the team in determining the presence or absence of a disability that may interfere with school participation

 

-Provide detailed description of the student’s needs

 

-Provide accommodations or strategies needed to enable the student to participate, i.e. explicit means for meeting the identified needs (avoid specific service recommendations since these are determined by the team at the team meeting)