SOMAone agent
Start a notes session for today.
✓Used start session
✓Used read transcript
✓Used review session · Complete
Start an assessment from the intake.
✓Used start assessment from
✓Used read document · Complete
✓Used review report · Complete
Draft a letter to the school from this report.
✓Used create document from
📎Ask about what I can do…↑
LIVENotes SessionSession — Birch Sparrow
Microphone only — best for in-person sessions
LIVE TRANSCRIPT
Clinician: Last week we talked about the morning routine…
Client: It went better. I used the checklist twice.
Clinician: Twice is a real start. What got in the way?
Session TranscriptSession — Birch Sparrow
[00:03:12]Speaker 1Last week we talked about the morning routine. How did the checklist go?
[00:03:31]Speaker 2Better than I expected. I used it twice, and the second morning we were out the door on time.
[00:04:02]Speaker 1Twice is a real start. What got in the way the other days?
Rename a speaker · Swap Clinician and Client for the whole transcript — the words stay where they are.
READYClinical Notes6 sections · your format · Soma default
Current Presentation

Session focused on progress with the morning-routine goals set last week. Barriers to the second goal were reviewed and one support was adjusted.

Session Content

Client reviewed the week in detail, described two successful uses of the checklist, and named the transition out the door as the remaining sticking point.

Observation and Assessment

Client was engaged throughout, with affect notably brighter than the prior session. Self-talk about the goals was more flexible and less self-critical.

Interventions

The checklist was refined with an evening cue, and the adjusted routine was practised in session. Psychoeducation on habit formation was briefly revisited.

Setbacks/Barriers/Progress

Progress on both treatment goals, with two successful checklist uses reported. No new barriers; weekday time pressure remains the main constraint.

Plan for Next Session

Keep the checklist and add the evening cue. Review progress in one week.Update Notes

READINGReading your documents — 3 of 3
test-protocols.pdf
clinical-interview.pdf
school-records-2024.pdf
A document we can’t read scores from still reaches the report as text — nothing is dropped.
Document Reviewthe de-identified text, nothing else
test-protocols.pdfTest data
clinical-interview.pdfIntake / Interview
school-records-2024.pdfCollateral
Documents reviewed. Generate the report when ready.Continue →
CompleteReport review11 sectionsDownload .docx
Reason for Referral

[CLIENT] is a 34-year-old adult referred by [REFERRER] for a psychoeducational assessment of long-standing attention and executive-functioning difficulties. [CLIENT] reports lifelong challenges sustaining attention on effortful work, following through on multi-step tasks, and managing time and deadlines. The referral questions include whether a specific learning disorder is present, whether an attention-related presentation better accounts for the difficulties, and which accommodations and supports are recommended.

Background Information

History was gathered from the clinical interview and the records provided. Developmental milestones were reported as age-typical, with no significant medical history and normal vision and hearing. [CLIENT] described consistent academic difficulty from the middle grades onward, with written work taking far longer than peers despite strong class participation. A first-degree relative carries an attention-related diagnosis. [CLIENT] is currently employed full-time and reports that deadline-heavy periods are the most difficult.

Behavioral Observations

[CLIENT] arrived on time and engaged warmly with the examiner. Attention was adequate across shorter tasks, with visible fatigue and self-corrected drift on longer timed measures. Effort and persistence were strong throughout, and standardized procedures were followed. The current results are considered a valid and reliable estimate of [CLIENT]’s functioning.

Assessment Measures Administered

The assessment included a clinical interview, a review of the records provided, a standardized cognitive battery, standardized measures of academic achievement, multi-rater attention and executive-functioning scales, and self-report measures of mood and day-to-day functioning. Collateral rating forms were completed by [PERSON_1].

Cognitive Assessment

Overall cognitive ability fell within the average range (standard score 104, 61st percentile, 95% CI 99–109). Verbal reasoning emerged as a relative strength (82nd percentile), while working memory (27th percentile) and processing speed (21st percentile) fell at the lower end of the average range. The difference between verbal reasoning and processing speed was statistically significant and uncommon — a pattern consistent with the reported difficulty translating strong ideas into finished written work.

Academic Achievement

Reading and mathematics fell within expectations for age and ability. Written expression fell below expectations (standard score 84, 14th percentile), with spelling intact; the gap between predicted and obtained written-expression scores was statistically significant. In practical terms, [CLIENT] produces accurate but markedly slow written output, which mirrors the presenting concern.

Attention and Executive Functioning

Rating forms were valid and interpretable across raters. Inattention scales were elevated for both self-report (T = 71, Elevated) and collateral report (T = 68, Elevated), while hyperactivity-impulsivity scales fell within the average range for both raters. This cross-rater convergence, together with the working-memory and processing-speed findings above, is consistent with a predominantly inattentive presentation; organization and time management were the areas most affected day to day.

Behavioral and Emotional Functioning

Validity indices were acceptable across forms. Mild performance-related worry was reported (T = 62, At-Risk), concentrated around deadlines and evaluative settings; mood and broader screening scales were otherwise unremarkable, and no critical items were endorsed.

Additional Assessment Domains

Adaptive functioning was age-typical per self- and collateral report, with independent management of household, financial, and occupational demands. Social functioning was described as a strength and a reliable source of support.

Summary and Diagnostic Formulation

Taken together, the history, observations, cognitive profile, academic results, and multi-rater scales converge on a consistent picture: average-to-strong reasoning alongside specific weaknesses in working memory, processing speed, and written output, with elevated inattention across settings. The findings above are integrated into a working formulation for the clinician’s review; all diagnostic decisions remain the clinician’s.

Recommendations

Structured deadline scaffolding for multi-step projects and a distraction-managed workspace for sustained writing are recommended. Extended time on written tasks is recommended. Review the accommodations at the next annual meeting. Follow-up review is recommended in twelve months to monitor response to the supports above.

DraftLetter — draft.docxfrom the signed report
To the IEP Team

I am writing regarding [CLIENT], whom I recently evaluated…

The findings support extended time on written tasks and predictable transitions across the school day.