OT evaluation report template for school-based OT

By the IEP Atlas editorial teamLast updated November 1, 2026

Short answer

A school-based OT evaluation report covers the referral question, records reviewed, assessment methods, classroom observation, interviews, standardized results, functional performance in school tasks, strengths, educational impact and recommendations for the IEP team. Use the fill-in template below, then compare your draft with the completed example for a fictional 2nd grader.

A school OT evaluation answers one question: does a motor, sensory or self-care need keep this student from taking part in their education, and if so, what would help? The report is read by the IEP team, by parents at a kitchen table and sometimes by a hearing officer years later. It should be clear to all three.

This page gives a fill-in template, section-by-section notes on what reviewers and parents look for, and a completed example for a fictional student. For how school OT differs from a clinic evaluation, see school-based OT vs clinical OT. The occupational therapy IEP goals pillar covers what comes after the report.

Timelines and rules that shape the report

The rules below are federal. States can set shorter timelines or add requirements, so check your state's rules.

Rule	What it says	Source
Consent	The school must get informed parent consent before an initial evaluation	34 CFR 300.300^[1]
Initial timeline	Within 60 days of consent, or the state's own timeline	34 CFR 300.301^[2]
Methods	Use a variety of tools; no single measure decides eligibility or the program	34 CFR 300.304^[3]
Existing data	Review existing records, observations and parent input first	34 CFR 300.305^[4]
Reevaluation	At least once every 3 years unless parent and school agree it is not needed	34 CFR 300.303^[5]

Put the consent date and the due date at the top of the report. The IEP due date calculator works out the deadline from the consent date. For the full process, see the IEP evaluation process and the 60-day timeline guide.

The fill-in template

Copy each section. The note under each heading says what to write.

1. Identifying information

Student name, date of birth, age at testing, grade, school.
Evaluation type: initial, reevaluation or independent request.
Date of consent, dates of testing, date of report, due date.
Evaluator name and credentials, and other team members who contributed.

2. Reason for referral

Who referred the student and when.
The specific concern in the referrer's words, such as "cannot finish written work" or "needs help with coat and zipper."
The question this evaluation will answer.

3. Background and record review

Relevant health, developmental and school history from records and the parent.
Current IEP or 504 plan, services and accommodations, if any.
Prior OT services in school or a clinic, with dates.
Vision and hearing screening results and dates.

4. Assessment methods

List every method: record review, observations, interviews, work samples, checklists and standardized tests.
For each standardized test, give the full name and the date given.
Note any changes to standard administration and why.

5. Classroom observation

Setting, date, length and activity observed.
What the student did, in observable terms, with counts or times where possible.
How peers performed on the same task, for comparison.

6. Interviews

Teacher: performance on written work, materials, self-care and participation.
Parent: concerns at home, strengths, history.
Student: what is easy, what is hard, what helps.

7. Standardized results

A table with test, area, score, percentile and a one-line plain meaning.
A note on validity: effort, attention, language and anything that affected results.

8. Functional performance at school

One short section per area assessed: fine motor and tool use, handwriting or keyboarding, visual motor and visual perception, self-care, sensory processing and participation.
For each, describe real school tasks with work samples and numbers.

9. Strengths

What the student does well, in school terms, including interests the team can use.

10. Summary and educational impact

What the results mean together.
How any need affects access to the curriculum or participation in school routines.

11. Recommendations for the IEP team

Areas that may need goals, with suggested baselines.
Possible accommodations, supports or assistive technology to consider.
Whether OT as a related service may be needed, framed as a recommendation for the team. The IEP team decides services.

What reviewers and parents look for

Section	What a reviewer checks	What a parent wants to know
Reason for referral	The question is specific and the report answers it	"Did you look at what I was worried about?"
Methods	More than one tool; observation in a real setting	"Did you watch my child in class?"
Standardized results	Scores explained in plain words; validity noted	"Is my child behind, and by how much?"
Functional performance	Real school tasks, with numbers	"What can my child do and not do at school?"
Strengths	Present and specific	"Did you see what is good about my child?"
Educational impact	Linked to school, not only to test scores	"Why does this matter for learning?"
Recommendations	Tied to findings; services left to the team	"What happens next?"

Two habits make a report hold up. Every recommendation should trace back to a finding in the report. And every finding about function should come from school, not only from a test table. A low score with no classroom impact rarely supports a related service. Normal scores with real classroom problems often still do, because the evaluation must look at function, not only at scores.^[3]

Write standard scores and percentiles with a plain sentence: "A standard score of 82 is at the 12th percentile. That means about 88 of 100 students the same age scored higher." The percentile rank and standard score entries explain both.

Completed example: Ben, grade 2

The student and all data below are fictional.

1. Identifying information. Ben, age 7 years 9 months, grade 2. Initial evaluation. Consent signed October 2; testing October 14 to 23; report October 28; due date December 1 under a 60-day timeline.

2. Reason for referral. His teacher referred Ben in September because "his writing is hard to read and he cannot finish work." His parent added that he needs help with buttons and shoelaces. Question: does a fine motor or visual motor need limit Ben's written work and self-care at school?

3. Background and record review. Ben passed vision and hearing screening in September. He has no prior OT. His report cards note strong oral reading and slow written work. He receives no other services.

4. Assessment methods. Record review; 2 classroom observations (writing block and dismissal); teacher, parent and student interviews; 3 work samples (copied, dictated and composed); a norm-referenced test of visual motor integration with its visual perception and motor coordination subtests; a teacher sensory checklist.

5. Classroom observation. During a 20-minute writing block, Ben copied 2 of 4 sentences from the board; most peers copied all 4. He erased 11 times and shook his hand twice. At dismissal he took 6 minutes to zip his coat and pack; the class average was about 2 minutes.

6. Interviews. His teacher reports that Ben knows the answers but writes 1 sentence when peers write 4. His parent says he avoids drawing at home and loves building sets with large pieces. Ben said, "My hand gets tired and the letters go wrong."

7. Standardized results.

Test area	Standard score	Percentile	Plain meaning
Visual motor integration	82	12th	Below most peers at copying shapes
Visual perception	101	53rd	Average at seeing and matching shapes
Motor coordination	79	8th	Below most peers at precise pencil control

Ben worked with good effort. Results are a valid picture of his skills.

8. Functional performance. Handwriting: On a 3-sentence copy task, 52% of letters were formed correctly and 9 of 20 word gaps were correct. Ben copied 12 letters per minute. Fine motor: He holds the pencil with a tight fist-like grasp that changes after about 3 minutes. He cuts within a quarter inch of a curved line on 40% of the outline. Self-care: He buttons 1 of 4 buttons and completes 2 of 7 shoe-tying steps. Sensory: The teacher checklist showed no concerns that affect participation.

9. Strengths. Ben reads above grade level, explains his ideas well out loud and builds complex models from pictures. He keeps trying when tasks are hard.

10. Summary and educational impact. Ben sees shapes accurately but has trouble controlling the pencil and other small tools. This slows his writing and makes it hard to read, so his written work does not show what he knows. It also adds time to dressing and dismissal routines.

11. Recommendations for the IEP team. The team may consider goals for letter formation (baseline 52% of letters), word spacing (9 of 20 gaps), hand endurance (about 3 minutes) and fasteners (1 of 4 buttons). Supports to consider: a slant board, a pencil grip trial, a printed copy of board notes and extra time on written tasks. Ben's needs may call for OT as a related service, at a frequency and in a setting the IEP team decides.

Turning the report into goals

Each recommendation above is already a baseline. Letter formation at 52% becomes a goal like those in IEP goals for letter formation. The fastener baseline becomes a fine motor goal. Write them into present levels using the OT present levels examples.

Mistakes that weaken an OT report

Scores without meaning. A table of numbers with no plain sentence leaves parents lost.
No classroom observation. A test room result says little about the classroom.
Clinic goals in a school report. "Improve core strength" does not tie to school.
Deciding services in the report. Recommend; the IEP team decides.
No strengths section. It is the first thing many parents look for.
Jargon. "Decreased bilateral integration" means little to most readers. Say "trouble using both hands together, such as holding paper while cutting."

For reading other reports the team may bring, see how to read a psychoeducational report. Templates for the goals that follow are on the goals for the OT role page. See evaluation and reevaluation in the glossary for the terms.

Frequently asked questions

What should a school OT evaluation report include?

Identifying information, reason for referral, record review, assessment methods, classroom observation, interviews, standardized results, functional performance at school, strengths, educational impact and recommendations for the IEP team. Each recommendation should trace back to a finding.

How long does a school have to complete an OT evaluation?

For an initial evaluation, federal rules allow 60 days from parent consent, or a timeline set by the state. Many states use a different number of days or count school days, so check your state's rules.

Can a student qualify for school OT with average test scores?

Possibly. The evaluation must look at how the student functions at school, not only at scores. A student with average scores who cannot complete written work or self-care routines may still need support. The IEP team decides.

Use it in IEP Atlas

Sources

34 CFR §300.300: Parental consent, U.S. Department of Education (IDEA website)
34 CFR §300.301: Initial evaluations, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
34 CFR §300.304: Evaluation procedures, U.S. Department of Education (IDEA website)
34 CFR §300.305: Additional requirements for evaluations and reevaluations, U.S. Department of Education (IDEA website)
34 CFR §300.303: Reevaluations, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
American Occupational Therapy Association, AOTA

Written and checked by the IEP Atlas editorial team under our editorial policy. This guide describes general practice and federal rules. It is not legal advice; your state may add requirements, and the IEP team makes the decisions for each student.