Skip to main content

iRubric: Treatment Plan rubric

find rubric

edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
Treatment Plan 
This rubric aims to serve as a guideline to strengthen clinical writing skills across practica.
Rubric Code: WX36672
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: Communication  
Type: Writing  
Grade Levels: Undergraduate, Graduate

Powered by iRubric Learning Outcomes
  Unsatisfactory

0-2

(N/A)

Reasonable

3-7

(N/A)

Fit for approval

8-10

(N/A)

Identifying Info

Unsatisfactory

3+ mechanical errors (e.g. spelling, punctuation); 2+ inaccurate data; 2 missing data
Reasonable

1-3 mechanical errors; 1 inaccurate datum; 1 missing datum
Fit for approval

No mechanical errors; Complete and accurate data
Background Info

Unsatisfactory

50% inaccurate data for the following: Re-identification of client or patient, Chief complaint/Pri. concern with referral source, relevant hxs, assessment findings re: proposed plan; Incohesive language in 50% of reporting; 2+ redundant statements; 3+ instances of professional language used inappropriately; 3+ mechanical errors.
Reasonable

75% accurate data for the following: Re-identification of client or patient, Chief complaint/Pri. concern with referral source, relevant hxs, assessment findings re: proposed plan; Cohesive language in 50% of reporting; 1-2 redundant statement(s); 2-3 instances of professional language used inappropriately; 2-3 mechanical errors.
Fit for approval

Complete and accurate data for the following: Re-identification of client or patient, Chief complaint/Pri. concern with referral source, relevant hxs, assessment findings re: proposed plan; Cohesive language in 75% of reporting; No redundancy; All professional language used appropriately; No mechanical errors.
Prognostic Statement

Unsatisfactory

Inappropriate degree ratings; Irrelevant or unsupportive indicators; 2+ Mechanical errors; Any incomplete or inaccurate data throughout; 1-2 inconcise statement(s);
Reasonable

2-3 relevant or supportive indicators; 1-2 Mechanical error(s);
Fit for approval

Appropriate degree ratings; 4-5 relevant and supporting indicators; No mechanical errors; Complete and accurate data throughout; 1-2 concise statement(s);
Long Term Goals

Unsatisfactory

Evidence of any STO components; not within the scope of practice; no reference to functionality; 2+ mechanical errors
Reasonable

1-2 mechanical error(s); Indirectly reflects functionality; partially influenced by the scope of practice; No evidence of STO components
Fit for approval

Stays within scope of practice; Speaks directly to functionality; No mechanical errors
Short Term Objectives

Unsatisfactory

2+ Objectives are not measurable or reliable; 1+ Incomplete STOs; 1+ Inaccurate data; Repetitive errors following peer review; 3+ mechanical errors; Excessive objectives not within reason to be addressed within reporting period
Reasonable

1-2 Objective(s) are not measurable or reliable; 1 Inconsistent unit of measure between raw data and target criterion for 1 STO; 1 incomplete STO; 1-2 mechanical errors; 1 inaccurate datum; Multiple objectives within reason to be addressed within reporting period
Fit for approval

Target behaviors are measurable and reliable; Complete STOs; Consistent units of measure between raw data and target criterion for all STOs; Target objectives appropriate and relative to LTGs; Baseline data began/ended accurate; Reasonable expectations given reporting period
Procedures and Materials

Unsatisfactory

Incomplete and inaccurate data for the following: proposed prescription, tx methodolog(ies) with brief description(s) and rationales, supports, materials/activities, carryover plan, client/family education, stabilization/mastery plan; 3+ instances of improper use of professional language; 3+ mechanical errors; Reported information lacks logical sequence; Inconcise reporting with >50% irrelevant qualitative and/or quantitative data;
Reasonable

Partial data; 1-2 improper use of professional language; 1-2 mechanical errors; 50% cohesive and logical discussion
Fit for approval

Complete and accurate data for the following: proposed prescription, tx methodolog(ies) with brief description(s) and rationales, supports, materials/activities, carryover plan, client/family education, stabilization/mastery plan; <1 instance of improper use of professional language; No mechanical errors; Reported information follows a logical sequence; Concise reporting with ALL relevant qualitative and quantitative data;
Closing

Unsatisfactory

Missing
Reasonable

Individualized
Fit for approval

Personable and individualized




Subjects:

Types:





Do more with this rubric:

Preview

Preview this rubric.

Edit

Modify this rubric.

Copy

Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.


Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
Share

Publish

Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.
 

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubrictm.

n202