Blog

  • 258. Assessment with Visually Impaired Kids, Part 1 w/ Dr. Carol Evans, Marnee Loftin, Dr. Terese Pawletko, May Nguyen, and Stephanie Herlich

    258. Assessment with Visually Impaired Kids, Part 1 w/ Dr. Carol Evans, Marnee Loftin, Dr. Terese Pawletko, May Nguyen, and Stephanie Herlich

    Would you rather read the transcript? Click here.

    Welcome to the first episode in a two-part series on assessment with visually impaired kids! I’m honored to have five highly accomplished and knowledgeable women on the show to discuss this complex and nuanced topic. Each of the guests brings their own unique perspective and experience to the discussion, creating a rich conversation that covers a LOT of ground. In this first episode, we tackle some basics. Areas that we discuss include:

    • Different types and definitions of visual impairment
    • Collaborating on these evals: who should be on the team and what do they do?
    • Planning the evaluation

    Cool Things Mentioned

    Intelligence Testing of Individuals Who Are Blind or Visually Impaired by Stephen Goodman, Marnee Loftin, and Dr. Carol Evans is posted on the American Printing House for the Blind and is an excellent resource for guidance on testing students who are blind or visually impaired (2011). 

    Psychoeducational Assessment of Students Who Have Visual Impairment: Perspectives of Teachers of Students Who Are Blind or Who Have Low Vision and School Psychologists is a doctoral dissertation by Dr. Carol Anne Evans (2007). 

    Most school psychologists already have assessment textbooks by Dr. Jerome M. Sattler on their bookshelves since many graduate programs include his series of books as required foundational reading. In the Foundations of Behavioral, Social, and Clinical Assessment of Children, Sixth Edition, chapter 20 is dedicated to visual impairments and co-authored by Dr. Sattler and Dr. Carol Anne Evans (2014).

    Previous Webinars & Handouts

    Making Evaluations Meaningful was written by Marnee Loftin (2006). A new edition will be released through the Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired Store hopefully sometime soon. Marnee generously has permitted excerpts from her book to be posted on Paths to Literacy.

    Jack Dial and Cognitive Test for the Blind

    The California School for the Blind Assessment Team has created a self-paced CVI Course using the Google Classroom platform. The class is free and perfect for anyone (teachers, paraprofessionals, specialists, families, etc.) who would like to gain a better understanding of

    Cerebral/Cortical Visual Impairment (CVI). The course covers what is CVI, causes, characteristics, screening and assessment tools, the CVI Range, and report writing.

    BRIEF-2

    BASC-3

    Kancherla et al

    Childhood vision impairment, hearing loss, and co-occurring autism spectrum disorder 

    Autism Spectrum Rating Scale

    CARS

    ASRS-2

    STACS: Standardized Tactile Augmentative Communication Symbols Kit 

    To gather more meaningful data on adaptive behavior, consider Independent Living Skills (ILS) Checklist from Michigan Department of Education Low Incidence Outreach, which is a great tool to consider to gather information collaboratively.

    Assessment Tools to Consider for MD & DB

    • Child-guided Strategies: The Van Dijk Approach to Assessment book contains guidelines for conducting an assessment for children with sensory impairments and multiple disabilities following the Van Dijk approach (e.g., no standardized protocols or materials, follows the lead of the individual child). Video examples of this approach are available.
    • Strategies for Assessing and Teaching Students with Visual and Multiple Disabilities by Millie Smith. The Sensory Learning Kit (SLK) – Guidebook and Assessment Forms are available from APH. 
    • Expanded Core High School Readiness Checklists from Utah School for the Blind address different grade ranges. For students who have multiple impairments, use the alternative checklist for students with severe multiple impairments in the PK‐K checklist on pages 50 to 51. You can request a free copy of the checklist by completing the Expanded Core Curriculum – High School Readiness Checklist Request Form
    • Learning to Listen Listening to Learn contains an informal checklist that includes items in the areas of auditory attention (maintaining attention, figure-ground discrimination), auditory discrimination, auditory memory (concepts and directions, sequence), listening skills for reading readiness, and social listening. 
    • The Personal Preference Indicator enables the planning team to identify and focus on preferences connected to choice-making activities, person-centered planning, and self-determination efforts. 
    • Communication Matrix: The Communication Matrix has created a free assessment tool to help families and professionals easily understand the communication status, progress, and unique needs of anyone functioning at the early stages of communication or using forms of communication other than speaking or writing. This is available in multiple languages.
    • How We All Learn (Campano, 2016): “This workbook is not an assessment tool, but rather a structured tool to provide technical assistance for educators and related service providers working with students who do not have a formal communication system.”
    • Home Talk is “an assessment tool for parents and care providers of children who are deafblind and who have other disabilities…HomeTalk can provide a broad picture of your child’s skills, special interests, and personality.”

    ​​Podcast Panelists’ Bios and Contact Info 

    Featured Resource

    I am honored to partner with PAR for 2021 to bring you featured items from their catalog! Listen to each episode for specific product recommendations and links. Learn more at www.parinc.com.

    The Testing Psychologist podcast is approved for CEU’s!

    I’ve partnered with At Health to offer CE credits for podcast episodes! Visit this link to access current and past episodes available for CE credit. You can use code “TTP10” for a discount on ALL the course credits you purchase from At Health!

    About Dr. Jeremy Sharp

    I’m a licensed psychologist and Clinical Director at the Colorado Center for Assessment & Counseling, a private practice that I founded in 2009 and have grown to over 20 clinicians. I earned my undergraduate degree in Experimental Psychology from the University of South Carolina before getting my Master’s and PhD in Counseling Psychology from Colorado State University. These days, I specialize in psychological and neuropsychological evaluation with kids and adolescents.

    As the host of the Testing Psychologist Podcast, I provide private practice consulting for psychologists and other mental health professionals who want to start or grow psychological testing services in their practices. I live in Fort Collins, Colorado with my wife (also a therapist) and two young kids.

    Ready to grow your testing services? Click below to schedule a complimentary 30-minute pre-consulting call!

    [x_button shape=”square” size=”large” float=”none” href=”https://app.acuityscheduling.com/schedule.php?owner=13476033&appointmentType=2843005″ target=”blank” info=”none” info_place=”top” info_trigger=”hover”]Schedule Your Call[/x_button]

  • 257 Transcript

    Hello, everyone. Welcome to The Testing Psychologist podcast, the podcast where we talk all about the business and practice of psychological and neuropsychological assessment. I’m your host, Dr. Jeremy Sharp, licensed psychologist, group practice owner, and private practice coach.

    This episode is brought to you by PAR. PAR has recently released the Feifer Assessment of Childhood Trauma, or the FACT, the first and only comprehensive instrument measuring how stress and trauma can impact children in a school-based setting. You can learn more or purchase the FACT teacher form by visiting parinc.com\fact_teacher.

    All right, y’all, welcome back to the final episode of The Testing Psychologist podcast for 2021. As is the tradition, the last episode of the year, we’ll look back at the most popular episodes of 2021 according to the number of downloads that each episode received. I’m going to count those down here pretty soon.

    But before I do that, I want to just congratulate all of you who made it through another year in your business, in your practice. Whether you’re working for someone else in private practice, in a school, in a hospital, or on your own, it’s been a heck of a year.

    I personally was hoping that we might be in a different place regarding the pandemic. And we certainly are. The vaccine came out and that has allowed a lot of us, I think, to feel more comfortable, both in our businesses and in our lives. However you feel about the vaccine and other personal preferences there, of course, you can’t deny that it was a huge development for the year. And for many of us, allowed us to get back to practice in person in some form or fashion. So again, congratulations all of you who made it.

    The hope of course is that we’ll be able to get back to normal, whatever that might look like or a new normal sooner than later. But I think we’ve all shown quite a lot of resilience over the last two years in adapting our practices and continuing to do good work and help folks the best that we can. So give yourself a little pat on the back.

    I’ve seen folks make lots of incredible decisions in their practices and in their lives through my consulting work. I’ve seen many folks who’ve been able to grow their practices and continue to thrive or build an even larger practice over the last year. And I’ve worked with some folks who have decided to dial back their schedules and raise their fees and do more of a lifestyle practice where they’re not working all the time. So whatever the effect this past year has had on you and your life and your practice again, just give yourself some credit for making those choices and doing the best that you can given the circumstances.

    As far as the podcast goes, the audience has continued to grow over the past year, which is truly amazing. I keep thinking at some point we’re going to reach the apex of downloads and capture all of the individuals out there who care enough about assessment to listen to the podcast, but we have not hit that point yet. So I always appreciate it if you keep telling your friends. There are any of you who listen regularly but don’t subscribe. Definitely do that. That certainly helps as I look for more quality sponsors to bring you discounts and products that could help you in your practice. I appreciate all of you for spreading the word.

    I’m also very grateful for all of my guests. I’ve been so fortunate to have just an incredible array of guests on the podcast to talk about a variety of topics and share their expertise. So, a huge thank you to all of my guests who’ve come on and shared their knowledge.

    All right. I will not keep you in suspense too much longer. Let’s go ahead and get to the top five episodes of 2021.

    Okay, everyone. We are back. Just like before, I’m going to count down the top five episodes. Each of these episodes is linked in the show notes. If you didn’t catch them the first time around, you can definitely go back and check them out. And if you’d like to do a second listen, these are all worth it. They’re all fantastic episodes.

    Let’s start with the number five most downloaded episode of 2021. This episode was number 197: Evolution of Cognitive Assessment with Dr. Joel Schneider. I really enjoyed this podcast. Joel has been around for a long time in our field. He’s been writing and maintaining a blog for 10 or 12 years on a number of topics that I just find fascinating. I love Joel’s style. I love his writing style and his speaking style, to be honest. So this podcast for me was more of a philosophical conversation than anything else. And the way that Joel presents information is so clear and yet so prosaic that I walked away from this interview in a really, really nice headspace and just wanted to hear more from Joel.

    We talked about the history of cognitive assessment, where it came from, what it originated from and what we’re actually measuring when we say cognitive assessment. And just that topic in and of itself took us down several different fascinating paths. We do end up talking about more applied information with regard to cognitive assessment. And I think that was a nice way to round out the interview. So number 197: Evolution of Cognitive Assessment with Dr. Joel Schneider.

    The fourth most downloaded episode of 2021 was episode 209: Conceptualizing and Treating Irritable Kids with Dr. Melissa Brotman. This was an interview that I had been pursuing for years. I originally tried to get Dr. Ellen Leibenluft on the podcast. She was one of the researchers who helped develop the criteria for disruptive mood dysregulation disorder. And in talking with her, she actually suggested that I get in touch with Melissa, who was a fantastic guest.

    Melissa has worked on that team and on other teams on a variety of projects, but we spent this time during the interview really talking about those kids who fall between diagnostic boxes, those kids that might reach the threshold for a disruptive mood dysregulation disorder diagnosis, but also those kids who are just irritable and cranky and grumpy.

    So we talk about what that’s about, diagnostically, how to think about these kids, we spend a fair amount of time talking about a treatment modality that Melissa is developing with her team that focuses on exposure therapy for irritability and anger. So, if that sounds interesting at all to you and it should if you work with kids, certainly check out episode number 209: Conceptualizing and Treating Irritable Kids w/ Dr. Melissa Brotman.

    All right. The next episode on our list, the third most downloaded episode was episode number 215:Cognitive Testing for Preschoolers with Dr. Stephanie Meyer. Now, this is a topic that we have not touched on much on the podcast. And I think that that is a big reason that it was so popular. That, of course, along with Stephanie’s style which is relatable, informative, and really quite thorough.

    Stephanie talks through her methods for assessing preschoolers, the things that she’s looking for, the way that she looks at data, she also talks about some of the graphs that she makes to communicate evaluation results. And all of those factors contributed to this being the number three most downloaded episode of 2021, episode 215: Cognitive Testing for Preschoolers with Dr. Stephanie Meyer.

    Let’s take a quick break to hear from our featured partner.

    Kids are experiencing trauma like never before, but how can you figure out whether they’ve been affected and how it impacts their behavior and performance at school? The Feifer Assessment of Childhood Trauma or the FACT is the first and only comprehensive instrument measuring how stress and trauma can impact children in a school-based setting.

    The FACT teacher form solicits the teacher’s perspective on the performance and behavior of children ages 4 to 18 years. It takes just 15 seconds to administer. And the available e-manual gives you detailed administration and scoring instructions. You can learn more or purchase the FACT teacher form by visiting parinc.com\fact_teacher.

    All right, let’s get back to the podcast.

    Okay, we’re getting close y’all. The next most downloaded episode, the second most downloaded episode of 2021 was episode number 230: Identifying Adult Autism with Dr. Theresa Regan. Now, as you can tell from the title, you could probably guess why this was a popular episode. Any episode that I’ve done on autism has been extremely popular. Adult autism is certainly no exception.

    Dr. Theresa Regan has specialized in adult autism for a number of years. She has some fantastic materials available for those of you wanting to learn more about this topic. We talked through a lot of different things related to autistic adults.

    I think the biggest takeaway for me from this episode was some of the concrete questions that Theresa uses that you’re not going to necessarily read in a book or a diagnostic manual or anything like that. These are sort of soft questions, the questions that get up soft signs of autism that can help suss out what is really going on for someone or identify adult autism when you may not have had it on your radar before. So tons of good information to take from this podcast. Again, episode number 230: Identifying Adult Autism with Dr. Theresa Regan.

    Okay. DRUMROLL, PLEASE! I wish I was sophisticated enough to insert a drum roll sound. I’m sure I could do that somehow, but I’m not going to do that. Just think drum roll in your head.

    The number one most downloaded Testing Psychologist podcast episode of 2021 was episode 199: Conducting a Valid ADHD Assessment with Dr. Julie Suhr and Dr. Allyson Harrison. I got more comments about this episode. than any other episode that I’ve ever done, perhaps just excluding the masterclass with Dr. Stephanie Nelson from two years ago or last year.

    So many people emailed me or commented about this episode because I think it blew a lot of people’s minds. Dr. Julie Suhr and Dr. Allyson Harrison have been researching valid research-supported ADHD assessments for years. And during this episode, we talk about a number of topics that will binge your brain a little bit.

    They shared how many college students end up with ADHD diagnoses without valid documentation, essentially. And so, we talked through why it’s important to have valid documentation. We talk about the ways to do that. We talk about validity measures in symptom reporting. We talk about the criteria that need to be documented. I think that the takeaway from all of this is that we as psychologists have it incumbent upon ourselves to document ADHD symptoms very clearly and conduct a very thorough evaluation, particularly for adult ADHD or college students with ADHD. We need to include performance validity testing to make sure that we have a valid assessment and a number of other things.

    This was a fantastic episode. These women are highly knowledgeable. They’re doing great work and I encourage you to check this one out if you missed it the first time around, or just listen to it again, I’m sure you will take away even more information the second time around.

    There you have it, folks. There you have it. The top five episodes of 2021. Again, number 197: Evolution of Cognitive Assessment with Dr. Joel Schneider. Number 209: Conceptualizing and Treating Irritable Kids with Dr. Melissa Brotman. Number 215: Cognitive Testing for Preschoolers with Dr. Stephanie Meyer. Number 230: Identifying Adult Autism with Dr. Theresa Regan. And number 199: Conducting a Valid ADHD Assessment with Dr. Julie Suhr and Dr. Allyson Harrison.

    Thank you all so much for listening to the podcast. I have so much gratitude for all of you who continue to tune in and listen to the episodes and share your thoughts about the episodes. It is incredibly rewarding to talk with folks on the phone or get emails or get comments on the episode webpages about the podcast being helpful, being informative. It is really just a dream come true.

    I always like to reflect. It was almost five years ago to the day that I released the first episode of The Testing Psychologist. I had no idea that it would turn into what it has turned into. It’s a true blessing and a pretty amazing experience. So, thank you all for tuning in, for listening, for sharing, and being part of The Testing Psychologist world.

    I will be back in 2022. Many of you know that I committed to two episodes a week a year and a half ago. It was during the pandemic, of course. And I love it. So that will continue. I am working hard to bring on more sponsors to bring quality info and discounts and products to you. And I will continue to have stellar guests as well. So stay tuned. Subscribe if you haven’t. Follow if you haven’t. Rate it if you haven’t. I look forward to spending time with you in 2022. Take care y’all.

    The information contained in this podcast and on The Testing Psychologist website is intended for informational and educational purposes only. Nothing in this podcast or on the website is intended to be a substitute for professional, psychological, psychiatric, or medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment.

    Please note that no doctor-patient relationship is formed here, and similarly, no supervisory or consultative relationship is formed between the host or guests of this podcast and listeners of this podcast. If you need the qualified advice of any mental health practitioner or medical provider, please seek one in your area. Similarly, if you need supervision on clinical matters, please find a supervisor with expertise that fits your needs.

    Click here to listen instead!

  • 257. The Best Episodes of 2021

    257. The Best Episodes of 2021

    Would you rather read the transcript? Click here.

    Here we are at the end of another year! Looking back at my notes from the “Best Episodes of 2020” show, I’m admittedly surprised how many of those reflections are still accurate. I think many of us assumed that the pandemic would subside and perhaps disappear over the course of 2021, but unfortunately, that was not the case. There’s a little bit of deja-vu going into 2022, as many of us are again hoping “this will be the year.” 

    Despite the continued hardship, 2021 had many points of light. I saw conferences return, allowing us to connect with one another both online and in person. Many of us refined our business models and were able to get back to in-person work as well. My interactions with consulting clients showed that plenty of us were able to grow our practices and reach new levels of success, while others decided to dial back their schedules and adopt more of a “lifestyle practice.” And finally, the podcast audience has continued to grow. As in past years, I’ve been extremely fortunate to have stellar guests on the show who always bring a wealth of knowledge about assessment and private practice.

    I’m excited to see what 2022 has in store. Stay tuned and stay healthy!

    Cool Things Mentioned

    Featured Resource

    I am honored to partner with PAR for 2021 to bring you featured items from their catalog! Listen to each episode for specific product recommendations and links. Learn more at www.parinc.com.

    The Testing Psychologist podcast is approved for CEU’s!

    I’ve partnered with At Health to offer CE credits for podcast episodes! Visit this link to access current and past episodes available for CE credit. You can use code “TTP10” for a discount on ALL the course credits you purchase from At Health!

    About Dr. Jeremy Sharp

    I’m a licensed psychologist and Clinical Director at the Colorado Center for Assessment & Counseling, a private practice that I founded in 2009 and have grown to over 20 clinicians. I earned my undergraduate degree in Experimental Psychology from the University of South Carolina before getting my Master’s and PhD in Counseling Psychology from Colorado State University. These days, I specialize in psychological and neuropsychological evaluation with kids and adolescents.

    As the host of the Testing Psychologist Podcast, I provide private practice consulting for psychologists and other mental health professionals who want to start or grow psychological testing services in their practices. I live in Fort Collins, Colorado with my wife (also a therapist) and two young kids.

    Ready to grow your testing services? Click below to schedule a complimentary 30-minute pre-consulting call!

    [x_button shape=”square” size=”large” float=”none” href=”https://app.acuityscheduling.com/schedule.php?owner=13476033&appointmentType=2843005″ target=”blank” info=”none” info_place=”top” info_trigger=”hover”]Schedule Your Call[/x_button]

  • 256 Transcript

    Dr. Sharp: Hello, everyone. Welcome to The Testing Psychologist podcast, the podcast where we talk all about the business and practice of psychological and neuropsychological assessment. I’m your host, Dr. Jeremy Sharp, licensed psychologist, group practice owner, and private practice coach.

    This episode is brought to you by PAR. PAR has recently released the Feifer Assessment of Childhood Trauma, or the FACT, the first and only comprehensive instrument measuring how stress and trauma can impact children in a school-based setting. You can learn more or purchase the FACT teacher form by visiting parinc.com\fact_teacher.

    Hey, everyone. Welcome back to the podcast. Today’s guest, Dr. Robb Mapou is an ABCN board-certified clinical neuropsychologist practicing in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, and Chevy Chase, Maryland.

    For 30 years, he has specialized in the evaluation of adolescents and adults with learning disabilities and ADHD. However, for almost 10 years, he has been seeing individuals for evaluation of autism spectrum disorders as well. He also evaluates individuals with neurological conditions including memory deficits, dementia, traumatic brain injury, and stroke.

    Dr. Mapou is a consultant to the Federal Aviation Administration, the Delaware Division of Developmental Disabilities Services, Princeton University, and Howard University. He holds faculty appointments in the Department of Psychiatry at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences and the Department of Neurology (Psychology) at Georgetown University School of Medicine.

    Robb is here talking with me about neurodevelopmental disorders in adults. We cover many topics during this episode. We spend a good bit of time talking about interview strategies for adults with neurodevelopmental disorders. Specific questions you might want to ask. Things to be aware of. We talk about the definition of disability and how that has shifted over the years and some of Robb’s changing thoughts on that construct. We also spend a fair amount of time on disability law and the relevant guidelines when we’re considering accommodations for different neurodevelopmental disorders. So lots of information to take away from this one.

    It was a pleasure speaking with Robb. We met two years ago at an AACN conference, compared tattoos, and shared tattoo stories. And it was nice to get into a clinical context and really tap his expertise. So, I hope you enjoy this one. There’s a lot to take away.

    Now, if you’re a testing practice owner and you are looking for some group coaching and accountability or support, I would invite you to check out The Testing Psychologist mastermind groups. You can get some info at thetestingpsychologist.com/consulting and book a pre-group call there. There are enrolling cohorts for both beginner practice and intermediate practice groups that should start in the new year. So if that’s interesting, check it out, schedule a pre-group call and we’ll figure out if it’s a good fit for you.

    All right. Let’s get to my conversation with Dr. Robb Mapou.

    Dr. Sharp: Hey, Robb, welcome to the podcast.

    Dr. Robb: Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to be here. 

    Dr. Sharp: I love the opportunity to be able to talk with you. I first got your book on testing for ADHD in college students or young adults whenever it came, 10 years ago. Was that 10 years ago? Maybe 12.

    Dr. Robb: The publication date is 2009, but it actually dropped in the fall of 2008, like many books do that are published that time a year.

    Dr. Sharp: Yeah. I got that book and it was kind of a revelation. I just loved having all the explicit instructions and ideas and specific questions to ask. It was really valuable for me there for a long time. I’ve held a lot of those ideas. It’s so great to have you. I feel honored that you are here.

    Dr. Robb: Well, thanks. It’s my minor contribution to the field. And then now, a little bit out of date both in terms of the tests that we use as well as the evolution of the law, since then, perhaps a more important consideration. 

    Dr. Sharp: That’s true. I wonder if we might get into some of that here as we talk?

    I usually open with this question of why this particular work is important to you. I know that it was maybe more important in the past a little bit, but I’m curious, how did you stumble into this whole area of assessing ADHD and learning disorders?

    Dr. Robb: Well, at the time I started the work, actually my primary work was research on the effects of HIV and AIDS on the brain. I was doing a part-time practice with a group in Maryland, suburbs of DC. I had started there in 1992/1993. That was shortly after the Americans with Disabilities Act had been implemented in 1990. And what was happening was that the practice was getting more adults who were being referred and wondering about learning disabilities or ADHD.

    And so, wanting to be evidence-based, I started looking at the literature in the area to see, is there anything by which I can guide my assessments? And that population was my primary work for many years because that is what that practice did. The specialty was learning disabilities and ADHD.

    And as I looked at the literature, and there wasn’t very much. In the mid-90s, a book came out on assessment of learning disabilities in adults from folks down at Georgia State in their system there. Not Georgia State, the  University of Georgia. And around the same time, Kathleen Nadeau published her book on Adults with ADHD. And then we had the Hallowell and Ratey book Driven to Distraction that was really popular, but included so much in there that could or could not be ADHD that from a clinical standpoint, that was hard to apply.

    I started with those books and then started looking at other literature and gradually accumulated enough to go out and start doing some workshops on the topic, which I guess was somewhere around 1997 or so. And I started with a one-hour freebie workshop for the Maryland Psychological Association. And then it grew to three hours and then six hours and then 12 hours.

    What I often found in doing this work back then is that a lot of the reports that I would see did not adequately document the disability or the impact of the disability. They were brief psychoeducational evaluations that did not look at the underlying cognitive and language deficits that often go along with learning disabilities.

    When I began dealing with accommodations for High-Stakes testing in particular for the United States Medical Licensing Exam, the board exam, and then before that, the MCAT, the LSAT, I often had people referred who had been turned down. And that was largely because the evaluations were not thorough enough, didn’t demonstrate the disability well enough, and didn’t describe the impact on functioning beyond taking a standardized test because if it’s really a disability, it should be affecting all aspects of your life and not just test performance.

    And so, my reputation in being able to do these evaluations grew. I would get referrals. I did some appeals sometimes involving attorneys and was able to get people accommodations when they hadn’t been able to do so in the past. But that was also with a thorough credible job on these evaluations and trying not to overstate the data and turn what might’ve been a relative weakness into a disability.

    Now, granted, my thinking on this topic has really evolved over the years. And I looked back at some of my earlier writings on this book chapters. At that time I was more comfortable with the concept of, well if a person has average reading and writing skills and they have intellectual abilities of 120 or 130, they’re not able to read and write at the same level of their reasoning skills and their thinking skills.

    And for a while, I thought that was an acceptable definition of a disability. But over time, I began to really question that and began to look at the fairness issue. If your skills are really in the average range, what does that mean for the person who has an average intellect and average reading and writing skills? Why shouldn’t they get accommodations compared to the person with 120 or one 130 IQ and getting accommodation? So I became more conservative in doing that.

    The other thing that I noticed over time is that a lot of people just wanted the accommodation whereas intervention could be very helpful in terms of improving the skill. And yet people often didn’t want to do the work. It’s kind of akin if we look at ADHD to wanting a pill just to fix everything when in fact the problem could be depression, anxiety, overall stress level, a sleep problem, something that would take a lot more work to “fix.” I continued to see that over time.

    My impression is perhaps what’s happened over the last 20 to 30 years, is that there is this expectation for everybody, for stellar academic performance. And if there is not stellar academic performance, the parents begin to think something is wrong and they seek out an evaluation. And to me, the purpose of the evaluation is to figure out what the problem is and what to do about it. And that might or might not be accommodations or medication, but as I saw more people who the only thing that they wanted was an accommodation on a test, I said, I’m not sure I’m the best person for you to see.

    And that truly was my bread and butter for many years, and I never would have done that. Perhaps I changed in my approach also because the folks I work with now, many of whom are on the autism spectrum, some of whom have very complex histories with a lot of psychiatric overlays that needs to be teased out as to whether it is secondary to autism or really it’s the primary disorder, these folks are struggling with life. Taking a test is the least of their worries.

    I was struck by this level of disability. I also began wondering about, well, what does it really mean to have a learning disability or to be impaired by ADHD? That has had an impact on my thinking of this. These days, I do far less of this. Most of my ADHD work ends up being undiagnosing people who want to be a pilot or an air traffic controller and are referred by the Federal Aviation Administration for an evaluation because somewhere along the way they read they’re diagnosed with ADHD, were treated with a psychostimulant without a diagnosis, and we have to figure out is that the true diagnosis?

    I still do diagnostic evaluations though. Sometimes these are combinations. I’ve got two right now that I’m working on both with questions of, is this ADHD, autism, or both? It’s really the process of doing that that again, I find lacking in a lot of evaluations. That is what I try to focus on. The detailed process of really applying the diagnostic criteria and seeing if people meet those criteria. I don’t know if I did meandering a little bit too much from your question.

    Dr. Sharp: No, I think you’ve managed to touch on about seven crucial points and ideas in our field right now over the last five minutes. So the challenge is which direction to go. I’m going to go, though with the philosophical question that, of course, turns into a reality.

    I wonder what thoughts you have about one of the points you touched on or maybe alluded to, which is the increase in prevalence or diagnostic rates for maybe ADHD or people seeking accommodations. Autism certainly is in there. It’s just skyrocketing. That’s a very open-ended question, but I trust that we can find our way through it.

    Dr. Robb: When it comes to ADHD, I’m not convinced that the prevalence has really changed in any way. Autism is another story because they do seem to be large population studies that indicate that the prevalence has been increasing. I can’t remember the figures right off the bat though I have compiled them for a recent workshop that I did for the FAA.

    We’re not sure the reasons behind that. It may be because we are looking now at folks who may be highly intelligent but lack social skills, have problems with flexibility, have intense interests that occupied their time to the detriment of other things but are still really, really smart. And often when I see that, they’re the folks who are really struggling to move forward in life because of the impairments.

    But with ADHD, there is nothing that seems to indicate the prevalence is increasing. I really think that social media has driven a lot of people to self-diagnose. I’m not on TikTok or Instagram or any of these places, Reddit, that people look, but there is so much out there right now where people are telling their stories about having ADHD or being on the autism spectrum. Other folks look at this and they begin to think, again with what happened with ADHD and now many ways autism, maybe this explains the difficulties that I’ve had.

    Now, for autism, if you’re an adult, there really is no treatment. There is no pill. It’s more I think a desire of people to figure themselves out, to conceptualize themselves. I’ve got two cases there right now, one of which may actually fit, and the other, I don’t think it does. These are all neurodevelopmental disorders. And again, the big piece that I find missing, even in evaluations from institutions or individuals who are considered competent in the area, what I often find missing is the thorough developmental history, especially with a parent and preferably some record reviews, because that’s where the information you need to make the diagnosis is.

    Again, with ADHD, someone may rely on an evaluation entirely on self-report on a rating scale and not bother to look at someone’s history. I saw this in the case of, again, a person who wanted to fly who had had a stellar military career as an enlisted officer, had risen through the ranks over the years, had nothing in a childhood history that would suggest ADHD, but his kid got diagnosed. He started thinking, hmm, maybe these are similar, went to a military mental health professional, and got diagnosed without the person really taking a look at the stress he was experiencing in his life, the increased stress of a new job, and the fact that he kept getting promoted without difficulty.

    That history is not typical of someone with ADHD. And yet he got diagnosed by several different people. Treated for some 10 years. Now, he wants to fly planes and the FAA says, at this diagnosis, you have to go get evaluated for it. But that historical piece is what I often find is missing. I found that missing in my early cases where people were turned down to accommodations because no one had documented that the difficulty had been there since childhood.

    Dr. Sharp: Sure. You’re touching on some pretty important pieces here. I wonder if we might dig in and talk about some details. So you mentioned the thorough diagnostic interview, certainly record review. I know some of the writing that you have done on this topic, you have some pretty extensive questions that you’re asking in that interview. Can we dive into some of that and just talk through it here?

    Dr. Robb: Yeah. That again really started with the work in learning disabilities and ADHD. I just recently finished the chapter on interviewing adults for neurodevelopmental disorders, autism spectrum disorder, attention deficit, hyperactivity disorder, and specific learning disorders, with a very brief- two paragraphs on intellectual disabilities, which are a lot easier to deal with in an adult because there’s going to be a history.

    In there, I have tables of information that one should collect in an evaluation through a combination of interviews with the patient, informants- preferably parents, review of academic records, medical records when relevant. And it’s really a semi-structured approach of what should be covered in these evaluations. It’s going to be in a book that is edited by Yana Suchy and Justin Miller specifically focused on interviewing adults during a neuropsychological assessment. So they’re going to talk about, how do you interview adults when the question is dementia or other traumatic brain injuries, and so on? And so this is on neurodevelopmental disorders.

    It gave me a chance to pull together my thoughts on, okay, what do I really want to ask? What information do I want to collect? And now before I see someone, I’ll actually print out a copy of the table, make sure that I cover everything. You can’t always get everything. Often parents may not remember. Again, in some of those cases, I’ll bring in a sibling to interview as well.

    But to me, these are, I mean, to everyone, they should be, neuro- meaning-affecting the brain, developmental disorders, which means they start in childhood. You don’t suddenly get ADHD as an adult. There has to be some into that. The same is true of learning disabilities and the autism spectrum. The problem may not become impairing until the demands of life exceed your capacities. And there are certainly very specific points when that happens, but the interviewing and the record review allow you to see, okay, what were some of the hints of these problems that were going on before?

    Dr. Sharp: Yes. I would love to ask you about some of those points where the impairment becomes more evident. Do you find that there are any consistencies or commonalities between people where they start to show up?

    Dr. Robb: Yeah, definitely. So the key areas to look at are really to start during those first years of life, infancy, toddler years, kindergarten. You are looking for any evidence of developmental delays in the language area, in the social area, emotional and behavioral regulation. There are often hints of that.

    Sometimes with intervention, these problems go away and the kid is fine, but then they may re-emerge at certain points. So beginning of school, learning to read, write, sit still in class, become important or less important in kindergarten or in the toddler years. This is where you may first see the manifestations of a specific learning disability or ADHD. But in kids who are really bright, you may not see that at all.

    Socially, during those early years, during the elementary school years, you have parents who are doing a lot of the ranging of social events and structuring it. So for kids on the autism spectrum, things may be less noticeable because they are not expected to be out there arranging their own social events.

    4th and 5th grade is the time when, as it’s been described, now you’ve learned to read. Now you have to read to learn. So again, problems in the learning disability area may come out at that point because the reading may not be smooth. Kids may not be comprehending what’s going on. So that’s another point where kids may be coming in for an evaluation.

    In the middle school years, there are increased demands on executive functioning and increased demands on forming your social group and finding your place. And the middle school years can be very difficult for kids with ADHD or on the autism spectrum. We see a fair number of kids that the social problems really become obvious in those middle school years whereas prior to that, the quirks that were there, the little professor syndrome, pedantic newness with adults. Adults may have gone, oh, wow, that’s really cute. I can really talk to this kid. It’s not so good when they can’t talk to their peers in middle school.

    High schools see more demands on executive functioning and social skill. At the same time in high school, kids who are quirky find a group of kids who are quirky and fit in with that group. College, now, the young adults are off on their own. Even more demands on executive functioning and expectations for independent social functioning. So that’s another point where someone may come in for an evaluation.

    And then finally, post-college, it may be that person has never been able to settle on a career. Failure to launch. Is unable to escape from their parents because they’re not able to get a job with which they can support themselves. For people with ADHD, it’s often the issue of not being able to focus and sustain attention on something that’s not of great interest, which emphasizes really the importance for folks with ADHD to find things for which they have a passion that will engage them and will help with that.

    Dr. Sharp: Right. It sounds like it, which maybe makes intuitive sense, but when you lay it out like that across the lifespan, I think it’s nice to get that big picture view. It’s really like this transition points that we need to be paying attention to and really digging in to see what’s happening, right?

    Dr. Robb: Exactly. It’s different from an acquired neurological condition where you’re going along, going along, going along and something happens. So you have a significant brain injury, for older adults or even some younger adults, a stroke, onset of symptoms, and multiple sclerosis. There’s been normal functioning all along.

    In this case, again, the concept is that these deficits may have been present, but up to a certain point you’re able to cope with them, and then you reach a point where the demands on social functioning, on attention and executive functioning, on written language, exceed what your capabilities are and then that leads to the assessment or to the referral.

    Dr. Sharp: Sure. So one of the things, I want to pull out this thread of, again, you touched on earlier, but this difference between disability and maybe inconvenience, that’s maybe not the right word, but you know what I mean. I’m so curious how you think about this and how that’s defined because I think that gets back to our discussion of self-identification or self-diagnosis. Who gets to define disability and impairment? is that us, is that the client, is it some combination? How do we sort through that?

    Let’s take a quick break to hear from our featured partner.

    Kids are experiencing trauma like never before, but how can you figure out whether they’ve been affected and how it impacts their behavior and performance at school? The Feifer Assessment of Childhood Trauma or the FACT is the first and only comprehensive instrument measuring how stress and trauma can impact children in a school-based setting.

    The FACT teacher form solicits the teacher’s perspective on the performance and behavior of children ages 4 to 18 years. It takes just 15 seconds to administer. And the available e-manual gives you detailed administration and scoring instructions. You can learn more or purchase the FACT teacher form by visiting parinc.com\fact_teacher.

    All right, let’s get back to the podcast.

    Dr. Robb: Well, that’s a good question. That’s what I grapple with. I think back to some of the earlier cases, in particular, one particular girl who I first saw I guess when she was 14 and she didn’t have extreme deficit. She was an average kid at that time, but her reading and spelling skills were lower if I recall this correctly. I ended up diagnosing her with dyslexia. She did reading intervention. And I think back, and this was like, I can’t think of the word right now that I’m looking for, but it really made a difference in her life.

    Let’s fast forward to now. She is a professor at an esteemed university teaching other students how to get around problems with executive functioning. I helped her get accommodations along the way. And I look back and I’m thinking if I saw her now, has my standard changed? Would I diagnose this differently? Because by any standard, at this point in her life, she’s not disabled. She is excelling. She is doing very well.

    And I also think back, she came from a family of very high achievers. Everyone in her family is either a doctor or a lawyer. And how much did that shape what she was going to be like, because indeed she was different from the other kids there, but now she has succeeded in her own field very well? I’d like to think that that diagnosis in the intervention really helped her. 

    Dr. Sharp: It sure sounds like it.

    Dr. Robb: But then I wonder, if she came to my office now, would I look at this in the same way?

    Dr. Sharp: Yeah, I’ve asked that question myself too on a smaller scale. I tend to see younger kids under 18 years. So, I see a kid at 5years old and make whatever diagnoses and then they return at 10years old or 12years old and they’ve had a lot of intervention, and I think man, I’d be hard-pressed to make that same diagnosis now.

    Dr. Robb: That speaks to one of the things that have influenced me where I have diagnosed maybe a mild disability. I’m dealing with a case right now, someone I saw back in 2016. He had a pretty well-documented history of learning disability and ADHD if I’m recalling correctly. At that time he was in college. He had had a bit of a Rocky college course. He left. Came back. He was getting ready to wrap things up and he wanted to go to medical school. So, of course, the goal was to get accommodations on the MCAT.

    I looked back because he recently contacted me. He said, I never took the end MCAT, but they did give me accommodations. They said, either I need to have a full updated evaluation or a letter stating that there really is no need and the problem is unchanged. And I looked back and it was interesting because what I said in the evaluation was, he’s had 50% time. Based upon the data that I have, I would recommend 25% time, but because this is what he’s had, and this is what’s led to success, and we can talk about, by the way, the arbitrariness of that 50% figure, I’m recommending this for that reason. And I’m recommending this on the MCAT, Medical School USMLE, and so on.

    The MCAT indeed granted him most of the accommodations but did give him 25% time, but with off-the-clock breaks for ADHD, which effectively can end up being 50% time. For whatever reason, he never took the MCAT. He ended up getting certification as an EMT and doing that work for a while and then returned to school, got accommodations again because it had been documented previously, and now wants to take the MCAT again.

    Essentially, my approach to this case was,  I spoke with him and I said, I looked back at your data and the thing I would caution you about is that based upon these data, I don’t think you’re going to get accommodations on the USMLE. You may get them on the MCAT, but I think the USMLE the US medical Licensing Exam is going to look at this and say, it doesn’t really meet up to the ADA definition of disability. It won’t be worth the fight. You’ll be better off doing some type of intervention if test-taking skills are still an issue for you.

    It was interesting. He said to me, “I’m not really interested in that. I’m not thinking about that down the line. I think I’ll do okay. I’m just looking at the MCAT now.” So I said, all right, I don’t see the point in doing a full evaluation. And I wrote a letter stating here’s what I found back then. Here’s what I recommended back then. Here’s what he got back then. I tested him as an adult. He was 21. I don’t have any reason to believe the profile has changed. So give him the same thing again.

    But there are other cases where I ended up in a position of having to recommend accommodations where I really didn’t feel the testing agency would approve it. And that became uncomfortable. I’ve gotten referrals in recent years, for example, United States Medical Licensing Examination Accommodations where I’ve said to the person, it is very tough to get accommodations. I’m willing to see you, but it’s with the understanding that we look at the profile and testing and decide, do you really qualify for accommodations or should we move in the direction of intervention?

    I happen to know a really good program that helps with test-taking skills for this. It’s called STATMed Learning at West Virginia. They are very successful in teaching people test-taking skills. In some cases, I have had people say, okay, I’m willing to do that, and in other cases, sorry, all I want is the accommodation. And I said, “In that case, I’m really not the best person for you to see.”

    Dr. Sharp: Sure. I think you owe it to the client to prep them ahead of time if you can see that coming down the road, right?

    Dr. Robb: Yeah. I’ve been doing this now for 30 years. I’ve seen the testing agencies, that’s something that we can talk further about, which has to do with the changes in terms of testing agencies that began around 2012 or so, where we’ve since seen a shift. And it might be interesting to talk a little bit about the history of the ADA and the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 which has shifted the landscape in the last 5 to 10 years.

    Dr. Sharp: Got you. Yeah, I think it’d be helpful to at least touch on that to provide a little bit of context for the rest of our conversation. Yeah, if we can touch on that.

    Dr. Robb: So the Americans with Disabilities Act, the original one was passed in 1990. In 2008, the ADA Amendments Act was passed. And that was really designed to deal with invisible “disability” such as learning disabilities and ADHD. So different areas of life functioning were added because the ADA was really geared toward visible disabilities, physical disabilities that were quite obvious: blindness, deafness, things that were clearly there except that the application more and more was focused on invisible disabilities. So the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 was designed to remedy that.

    Now, you may recall from high school civics class that once a bill passed the Congress, they have to write regulations to implement that. And so, in 2011, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission wrote regulations to implement the ADA Amendments Act.

    And, again, the issue was to cover people with less severe impairments and really to focus on discriminatory conduct as opposed to whether or not one had a disability. And so, some of the definitions changed. It became less stringent and there was the acknowledgment that you can’t consider mitigating factors. For example, a person with ADHD may take medication, but they may still be disabled. And a disability could be cyclical, for example, a seizure disorder or multiple sclerosis. There also was a decreased emphasis on doing the types of more extensive evaluations that we do. And so we start, well, they should rely on what was described as common-sense judgment.

    Now, there’ve been documentation guidelines issued first by the Association on Higher Education And Disability in the late 1990s, and also by the Educational Testing Service that basically said, here’s what should be in a good evaluation of learning disabilities or ADHD. And they were expanded to other disabilities as well. But then, in 2012 after the EEOC regulations were issued, the Association on Higher Education And Disability did a review of that and said, Hmm, what really should be best practices for recommending accommodations? And so with their best practices, there was a decreased emphasis on written reports and an increased emphasis on self-report and observation say by a disability support professional.

    Now, at that time, I was on the board of the National Academy of Neuropsychology (NAN) and we began getting queries from neuropsychologists saying, “Hey, what are we supposed to do? This is going to eliminate an area of practice for us.”

    So I spoke with the then president of the Association on Higher Education And Disability. And basically what he said was these guidelines were meant for disability support professionals say at a college and not for psychologists. We’re not saying that there should be no documentation, but the bottom line is that in their guidelines of best practices, they said primary documentation should be the student’s self-report. Secondary documentation is observation and interaction with the disability support professional. And down after that, tertiary documentation was a formal report or IEP or something.

    And actually, a lot of disabilities professionals pushed back and said, this is asking us to be armchair psychologists and make this decision. We really can’t do that. But the idea was laudable because it was to reduce the burden on the student, to reduce the expense on the student. And this certainly could help out students from lower SES who were not able to afford this type of evaluation. That piece is really important.

    In early 2014, the department of justice issued their interpretation of the ADA Amendments Act of 2008. It essentially paralleled the EEOC regulations, but it was really prompted by increased complaints to the justice department about people who were turned down for accommodations on national examinations, the LSAT, CPA, other professional examinations.

    And so again, the justice department said, there shouldn’t require extensive analysis. You really should consider the evidence of a disability, not just from a clinical report. Then in May 2014, the Law School Admission Council administers the LSAT, settled a class-action lawsuit for people who had been turned down for accommodations. And I will say that one of my own clients at that time was involved with this lawsuit as a key plaintiff in the lawsuit. I had a few other people who were subsequently affected by the decision.

    LSAT at that point said, they’re no longer going to flag when accommodations were given because that would always be a key to the law school that something was different and they wouldn’t require an updated evaluation if the same accommodations being requested were granted previously on a college entrance exam or a GED, or in fact, another standardized test, let’s say the GMAT. They developed a panel for best practices, and then there was a compensation fund as well.

    In 2015, the expert panel recommendations for the LSAT came out. And what they said was documentation for the LSAT from the age of 13 and older should be accepted without needing an updated evaluation. Now, the problem that I had with that is a 13-year-old brain is not the 22, 23, 24-year-old brain because we know the frontal lobes mature and the brain changes. But I thought that was significant.

    In September 2015, the civil rights division disability rights section of the US department of justice issued recommended practices on testing accommodations in terms of what a testing agency should accept is the documentation for accommodations. And again, recommended that they should not be stringent. Some of the things that should be accepted included just simply a recommendation from a qualified professional, proof of past testing accommodations, observations from educators. Number four on this list is the result of psychoeducational or other professional evaluations, an applicant’s history of a diagnosis, and an applicant statement of his or her history regarding testing accommodations.

    Now, this in some ways, brought us back to the situation that prompted the first guidelines in the late 1990s, because at that time someone would come in for accommodation, say in college or elsewhere with a note from a psychologist or a psychiatrist, “Dear testing agency, Johnny has been diagnosed with ADHD and he should get 50% extended time on tests. Thank you. Doctor specialist.” And so the guidelines for documentation have risen out of that, but this almost seemed like a return to that. I can come back to that with a recent case shortly.

    So really since 2015, again, what DOJ said, if a candidate has previously had the same accommodations on a standardized test or in an IEP or a section 504 plan or in a formal plan in a private school or even informal accommodations, they should get the same accommodations on a standardized test. Period.

    Dr. Sharp: This seems to just fly in the face of a lot of my experience and I’m guessing others experience too.

    Dr. Robb: And this in a lot of ways is how we’ve seen the atmosphere change. They also said, testing agencies should defer to the opinion of a qualified professional over the opinion of “testing entity reviewers” who have never conducted the requisite assessment of the candidate. So they’re really saying, testing agencies should count on a reviewer. If a report comes in and says they should have the accommodation, they should.

    And then October 2016, the DOJ put regulations into place for this. And really, my read on this, the implications is that since the testing agencies and universities are increasingly being pressured to accept an evaluation, regardless of when it was done. A poorly done evaluation that does not show data consistent with the requested accommodation should be accepted. And if there’s an IEP and evidence of prior accommodations, an evaluation might not even be required.

    But consider the case of a kid who’s identified in 1st grade. They’re diagnosed with a specific learning disability. They get immediately into good evidence-based intervention, which we know exists for improving reading skills and can make a world of difference. Jack Fletcher and his colleagues have written about this in their book.

    We know that early identification and intervention can ameliorate or at least decrease if not even eliminate the problem. Although again, at those transition points that I mentioned, the problem may re-emerge, but also what if the initial documentation was poor? What if that report done in 2nd grade really only showed relative weaknesses, and they immediately went to accommodations with no intervention. I’ve seen this. Then that can get carried through over time.

    The school just updates the IEP or the 504 plan with no new evaluation. Then you get to the SAT, and the SAT basically says, okay, they’ve had the accommodation for a year. We’ll give them the same accommodation. And then you see the same thing happen with GRE, GMAT, LSAT, MCAT. It keeps getting passed down when in fact nobody has bothered to ask, huh, have they improved?

    I see a lot of college students that because of the volume of reading and writing they have to do in college, they get better at it. And after four years, they’ve improved, they’ve tested better. Again, as I said earlier, the 24-year-old brain is not the 13-year-old brain, the frontal lobes improve with time.

    There’s also the issue of self-report. If you’re relying on that alone, it can be motivated by secondary gain. And there are plenty of websites, blogs, et cetera, on how to convince people to give you accommodations, how to convince your doctor you have ADHD. So the kids can go out there and they want to get an edge. They want to do better. The diagnosis is not equivalent to a disability. And so if you don’t do an updated assessment, you’re not going to have data about a person’s functioning.

    Again, since then, we’ve continued to see […] I think of the definition of disability, even at the legal level. Now what we’re seeing is a lot of schools, a lot of colleges are dropping SAT or ACT requirements. Law schools are dropping LSAT requirements. February 2016, for example, the University of Arizona College of Law said they accepted the GRE instead of the LSAT. Other universities were considering this. By May 2019, 40 law schools were accepting the GRE.

    And so, I think we’ve really seen an evolution of this. In Canada, for example, my colleagues there have said that again, a simple note from a physician can speak to the issue of disability and the need for accommodation. So their testing centers there don’t need to do anything and are shutting down. 2016 colleges and universities in Canada can not require a diagnosis. They may only request a note from a healthcare professional stating the functional impairments that require accommodations and requested accommodations.

    Dr.Sharp: I understand the rationale and the intent to honor a client’s experience and not put them through any number of unnecessary evaluations. And this seems like it’s going too far, at least.

    Dr. Robb: It does fit in with the concept of nothing about me without me and the advocacy within different communities of neurodiverse folks. And that isn’t a bad thing. Frankly, if we got rid of time tests, that would solve the problem. Do we really need time tests?

    Dr. Sharp: That’s a great question.

    Dr. Robb: I’m guessing in the pandemic, we see less of this. Reportedly, I think there’ve been articles about more cheating during the pandemic. But again, is it fair to that student who is just average and is not getting accommodations if the person of 120 or 130 IQ and average reading gets the accommodation? This has affected clinicians. It’s another reason why I don’t like doing as much of this work because essentially you’ve got parents who want extended time to help a child reach his or her potential.

    That wasn’t the purpose of disability law. The purpose of disability law was to provide access to a test. Then the parents complain, “Well, Johnny who is sitting next to my kid over there is getting extended time even though they don’t have an obvious disability. So why should my kid be penalized?” They think extended time will solve the problem.

    What I found with ADHD is that college students I see with ADHD, it ain’t the tests, the issue is sitting down and getting the work done. So they’re putting off studying till the last minute or not studying at all. They’re not getting assignments done. They need an executive functioning coach. They may need medication, but 50% time on tests doesn’t make any difference. And there’s some research that kind of bears that out.

    Dr. Sharp: Yeah. I was just going to say, I feel like I’ve read that, that the extended time accommodation isn’t actually that helpful for kids or adults with ADHD.

    Dr. Robb: Yeah. And there is some work, again, my colleague, Allyson Harrison who I think would be a great person to interview if you haven’t interviewed her yet.

    Dr. Sharp: We did. She and Julie were on the podcast maybe a year ago. I don’t know. I’ve lost track of time, but they talked about this. Well, they talked primarily about evidence-based assessment for ADHD and how to determine whether someone has ADHD.

    Dr. Robb: What Allyson has also done there with a special issue, and she’s actually working on a new one in psychological injury and the law, they talked about testing issues, and they did one study where they looked at how much time students in Canada received for as an accommodation, and how much time did they actually used.

    And they found that the vast majority of students use no more than 25% extended time, if not less. And many students finished the test within the allotted time. They were really able to do an ecologically valid study looking at the amount of time that students were using. And it was way less.

    In the UK, the extended time has always been like 25% or 33%. That seems to work for people. Earlier, I talked about 50% being arbitrary. Somebody just pulled that out. I don’t know where it came from. There was never any empirical support that said, oh, this is the amount of time you should give it.

    Dr. Sharp: And you make those recommendations, where does that come from? Is there any grounding in data?

    Dr. Robb: There really is no good grounding in data. What I look at is the degree of slowness on time tests. On the Nelson Denny Reading Test, do they finish it within the standard amount of time or not? Although frankly, the norms on the new Nelson Denny Reading Test, I think are much more realistic and way less conservative than the old norms. I have seen maybe some low average scores. It’s also now age normed, which is way better than being grade norm. So I highly recommend the new version of the Nelson Denny to get a read on reading, no pun intended.

    But we still don’t have any empirical studies that say, if this test, then give this amount of time. I sort of laid a little bit of that out in my book in a series of charts there, but nowadays, I look carefully, I will ask the person, okay, you have 50% time, how much time do you really use? And more often than not I hear, well, no, I don’t use the full amount of time. Sometimes even I hear, I actually don’t need it.

    Dr. Sharp: I hear that a lot as well.

    Dr. Robb: I think that’s an important question to ask. But again, I think there’s a lot of pressure on evaluators because the parents believe the extended time will solve the problem. And then they’re unhappy when they don’t get what they want, especially when they’re paying for a private evaluation because these are considered educational so insurance doesn’t pay.

    There’s a belief that the extended time will ease anxiety during tests and improve performance, but performance anxiety is not a disability. And then, when you get to the college level, the students want the extended time on classroom standardized test scores so that they could get into the prestigious college, graduate school, medical school, law school, and so on. There’s a desire to have psychostimulant medication to gain an edge when studying and taking tests. Things have just gotten so competitive. I’ve described this as like wanting to lose weight or build muscle without working out. You got to do some work to build the skill when the skill is weak rather than just simply accommodating that.

    So, that combined with the types of folks with these complex issues who are not managing life very well has really moved me away a lot from doing these evaluations. I will do them occasionally provided that I have a client who’s willing to listen to what I have to say. It’s not if I ask for your opinion, I’ll give it to you. If they’re coming to me as a professional presumably because I have some expertise and if they’re not really interested in that expertise and they already have an agenda, it’s best for them not to see me.

    Dr. Sharp: Yeah. I think it’s nice to be clear in that and to find a script or a way to say that to clients because I think a lot of us get drawn into wanting to “help.”

    Dr. Robb: So, this podcast will definitely not help increase my referrals, but that’s fine because I’m trying to be semi-retired. So, I don’t need more referrals at this stage of my career.

    Dr. Sharp: Anti-marketing. Tell the truth. Well, let me ask you one last question before we wrap up. And this is just a very applied question. Doing any kind of evaluation like this for adults with neurodevelopmental concerns, record review is a big part of these evaluations. So I’m really curious how you handle it when you can’t get records or the adult says, I don’t want you to talk to anyone in my family. We’re estranged. It’s not private, whatever.

    Dr. Robb: That’s really tough. It’s a little bit easier with a learning disability because that’s where the tests themselves tell you what’s going on. With autism spectrum, with ADHD, which are behaviorally diagnosed disorders for which you need a history and current symptoms, it is a lot tougher. And I may say I’m not able to make a definitive diagnosis. I can tell you what I think this might be, but I will say in a report I could not establish a childhood history of ADHD, and just leave it at that.

    And it’s kind of like, well, here are the problems that you’re having in everyday life. If you want to talk to your doctor about stimulant medication at this point, that’s between you and your doctor. I think because of the problems that you’ve told me about with planning, organization, getting work done, you would really benefit from an executive functioning coach, whether or not you have ADHD.

    And I’ve said this same about the autism spectrum. I’ve told some people, I’m not really sure if you meet the criteria, but I do think that a group like PEERS® for Young Adults, which is an evidence-based group, might help you in what you’re struggling with. And so the diagnosis doesn’t really matter. It’s what we do about it.

    In a case I’m dealing with right now, a young woman, again, came in with questions of being on the autism spectrum. She’s very successful in her work. She seems to have very good people skills, can read nonverbal cues. If she wasn’t able to do this, she wouldn’t be as successful as she has been. And there was a triggering event when her behavior changed. I basically said to her, we were hooked in very well, and I said to her, the diagnosis at this point doesn’t matter. Here’s what you need to work on. This is what you need to be doing, and it’s working on emotional regulation because that’s the biggest problem for her.

    And so again, if you direct the recommendations in the right direction, the diagnosis may not matter. And those are the folks who I’m most comfortable working with. They’re interested, but it’s not like… A good question to ask at the beginning, even during an intake is, well, what would it mean to you if I don’t diagnose you with autism, or I don’t diagnose you with ADHD? How would that feel? “Well, I would be totally devastated.” Then you either have to work with that or be aware of what you’re dealing with at that point.

    The main point to me of an evaluation is to figure out what am I seeing? What can be done about it independently of what the ultimate diagnosis is?

    Dr. Sharp: Yeah, I think that’s a good way to look at it. And being able to communicate that to clients sometimes is challenging if they are wrapped up or invested in a certain diagnosis.

    Dr. Robb: Yeah. And again, at this stage of my career, I try to head that off at the intake level to figure out, is this going to be a good match? Is this a person who I’m going to be able to work with, they’re going to be able to work with me and get something out of this, or are they looking for something else and I may not be the best match for them and that’s fine? 

    Dr. Sharp: Right. I think that’s a nice note to end on. I’ll take that as a boost of confidence maybe for clinicians out there to stand firm and to be able to say from the beginning, Hey, I don’t know if I’m going to be able to meet your needs. And then if I can’t, here’s what else we can do. Here’s another option or here’s what it might look like.

    Well, gosh, I feel like we covered a lot of ground in this conversation and at the same time, there’s so much more that can be said on any number of these topics, but I just appreciate being able to chat with you here for an hour or so and get your expertise and your thoughts and reflections on this work that we do. I know how challenging it can be. All the nuances. 

    Dr. Robb: I appreciate the invitation and to have a chance to talk with you because I’ve spent a whole career doing this and I like to at least share some of this wisdom, some of this knowledge with other folks. Hopefully, some of it will stick or they’ll say, Nah, I’m just going to keep doing what I’m doing.

    Dr. Sharp: I hope a lot of it is sticking. I will ask one last question. You’ve done many things over the course of your career. Where are you headed next? What’s on the horizon for you?

    Dr. Robb: I’m trying to slow down. I’ve got a lot of focus on the autism work, but also I’m in an underserved area here in Delaware and I’m getting dementia referrals. It’s kind of fun to return to my roots in neuropsychology and do some of these cases though, I’ve actually been consulting with a colleague who did this day in and day out just to make sure I’m on the right track.

    I’m learning more about that. I think lifelong learning is really important and probably a reason why I’ve shifted my focus over the years. If I look at what I’ve done, I trained in traditional neuropsychology with neurological patients and then moved into traumatic brain injury, severe traumatic brain injury, and then, we’ve done in the neuropsychiatric evaluation unit. For about six years, I did research on HIV and AIDSand the effect on the brain while I began to build the practice in the LD and ADHD area.

    And then, I don’t know, some 10 years ago, what really happened in the practice is that we were no longer getting just run-of-the-mill learning disabilities and ADHD. We were getting much more complicated cases.

    We began looking at the possibility of the autism spectrum, and I just got really interested in and intrigued by it maybe because of my own background with Ham Radio and science and nerd stuff. Never video gamed. I found the population really interesting to work with and tough because there are not a lot of resources for folks.

    At this point, I’m hoping to do a little bit more consulting, less hands-on practice. And I’m really trying to slow down though it’s not working that well at this point, I hope to be doing less and focus on other things besides work.

    Dr. Sharp: I hear you. Well, hopefully, folks take that away as well. That you don’t have to do the same thing throughout your career. You’ve done many things and it seems like enjoyed all of them in different ways. Thank you again. This is good.

    Dr. Robb: You’re welcome.

    Dr. Sharp: I hope our paths cross again soon.

    Dr. Robb: I’m sure they will. Bye.

    Dr. Sharp: Okay everyone. Thank you as always for checking out this episode. I hope you found it informative. I know we covered a lot of ground. There are a number of resources in the show notes. As we mentioned, Robb has done quite a bit of writing. He has written books and articles on these topics. So check those out.

    If you’re interested in some group coaching or accountability, you might check out the testing psychologist, mastermind groups. We’ve got cohorts enrolling for beginner practice and intermediate practice at the start of the new year. So, if that sounds like a good fit for you, or is even mildly interesting, schedule a pre-group call and we’ll figure out if it’s a good fit. You can do that at thetestingpsychologist.com/consulting.

    All right, that’s it for now. I will catch you next time.

    The information contained in this podcast and on The Testing Psychologists website is intended for informational and educational purposes only. Nothing in this podcast or on the website is intended to be a substitute for professional, psychological, psychiatric, or medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment.

    Please note that no doctor-patient relationship is formed here, and similarly, no supervisory or consultative relationship is formed between the host or guests of this podcast and listeners of this podcast. If you need the qualified advice of any mental health practitioner or medical provider, please seek one in your area. Similarly, if you need supervision on clinical matters, please find a supervisor with expertise that fits your needs.

    Click here to listen instead!

  • 256. Adults with Neurodevelopmental Disorders w/ Dr. Robb Mapou

    256. Adults with Neurodevelopmental Disorders w/ Dr. Robb Mapou

    Would you rather read the transcript? Click here.

    I read Dr. Robb Mapou’s book, Adult Learning Disabilities and ADHD, several years ago and remember being blown away with the detail of interview questions and strategies for evaluating these concerns. I’m so fortunate to have him on the podcast today to chat about a wide variety of topics related to adult assessment. These are a few areas that we cover:

    • More interview strategies for adult evaluations
    • The concept of “disability” getting diluted over the years
    • Legal guidelines and accommodations for standardized tests like the MCAT, LSAT, and others
    • The importance of gathering records in these evaluations

    Cool Things Mentioned

    Featured Resource

    I am honored to partner with PAR for 2021 to bring you featured items from their catalog! Listen to each episode for specific product recommendations and links. Learn more at www.parinc.com.

    The Testing Psychologist podcast is approved for CEU’s!

    I’ve partnered with At Health to offer CE credits for podcast episodes! Visit this link to access current and past episodes available for CE credit. You can use code “TTP10” for a discount on ALL the course credits you purchase from At Health!

    About Dr. Robb Mapou 

    Dr. Robb Mapou is an ABCN board-certified clinical neuropsychologist practicing in Rehoboth Beach, DE and Chevy Chase, MD. For 30 years, he has specialized in the evaluation of adolescents and adults with learning disabilities and ADHD. However, for almost 10 years, he has been seeing individuals for evaluation of autism spectrum disorders. He also evaluates individuals with neurological conditions including memory deficits, dementia, traumatic brain injury, and stroke. Dr. Mapou is a consultant to the Federal Aviation Administration, the Delaware Division of Developmental Disabilities Services, Princeton University, and Howard University. He holds faculty appointments in the Department of Psychiatry at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences and the Department of Neurology (Psychology) at Georgetown University School of Medicine.

    Get in Touch

    Website: Center for Assessment and Treatment, Chevy Chase, MD: https://caatonline.com/clinicians/dr-robb-mapou/
    Email CAAT: rmapou@caatonline.com
    Email DE: rmapou@gmail.com

    About Dr. Jeremy Sharp

    I’m a licensed psychologist and Clinical Director at the Colorado Center for Assessment & Counseling, a private practice that I founded in 2009 and have grown to over 20 clinicians. I earned my undergraduate degree in Experimental Psychology from the University of South Carolina before getting my Master’s and PhD in Counseling Psychology from Colorado State University. These days, I specialize in psychological and neuropsychological evaluation with kids and adolescents.

    As the host of the Testing Psychologist Podcast, I provide private practice consulting for psychologists and other mental health professionals who want to start or grow psychological testing services in their practices. I live in Fort Collins, Colorado with my wife (also a therapist) and two young kids.

    Ready to grow your testing services? Click below to schedule a complimentary 30-minute pre-consulting call!

    [x_button shape=”square” size=”large” float=”none” href=”https://app.acuityscheduling.com/schedule.php?owner=13476033&appointmentType=2843005″ target=”blank” info=”none” info_place=”top” info_trigger=”hover”]Schedule Your Call[/x_button]

  • 255 Transcript

    Dr. Sharp: Hello, everyone. Welcome to The Testing Psychologist podcast, the podcast where we talk all about the business and practice of psychological and neuropsychological assessment. I’m your host, Dr. Jeremy Sharp, licensed psychologist, group practice owner, and private practice coach.

    This episode is brought to you by PAR. PAR has recently released the Feifer Assessment of Childhood Trauma or the FACT, the first and only comprehensive instrument measuring how stress and trauma can impact children in a school-based setting. You can learn more or purchase the FACT teacher form by visiting parinc.com\fact_teacher.

    All right, everyone. Here we are again with the 5th episode in the Holiday Hopes series. If this is your first Holiday Hopes episode, definitely go back and check out the previous four. This is a short seven-part series where I’m talking about a different business topic each week leading up to the holiday with the intent to inspire you to change one or several of these things in your practice in the new year.

    Today’s episode is all about collections. I use the term collections in a general sense, not just specifically sending people to collections, we will talk about that, but collections in general, so tightening up your financial practices to make sure that you are collecting the money that you should be collecting in your practice. If that sounds compelling to you, listen on.

    Before I get to the full discussion though, I want to invite any of you who are at any phase of your practice to reach out if you are interested in group coaching. All three of my group masterminds: beginner, intermediate, and advanced have filled the current cohorts. So, I’m starting back over and filling new cohorts for each of those groups. So no matter what stage of your practice you’re at, there is a mastermind for you. And I would love to chat with you to see if it would be a good fit. You can get more information generally about the groups at thetestingpsychologist.com/consulting and schedule a pre-group call to see if it’s a good fit.

    All right, let’s talk about making that money.

    Okay, y’all. Let’s talk about money. Here’s the thing. There are many ways that we can lose money in our practices. Some of them are not immediately obvious. So I’m going to talk through, just briefly, three ways that you could be losing money in your practice. And then I’m going to talk through some strategies to stay on top of your finances and make sure that you’re getting paid for the work that you do.

    One of the ways that we lose money in our practice is by undercharging. When I say undercharging, they’re actually two elements to that. One is, literally undercharging, setting your rate too low. I’m not going to talk a whole lot about that because that’s a pretty straightforward process and I have already talked about rates in a previous Holiday Hopes episode.

    The other means of undercharging though that I want to touch on is working more than you are charging for. When I say that, I mean all those hours that you are putting into the evaluations that don’t get charged. I hear this so often from my consulting clients. They’re like, well, I felt bad adding on that extra hour or two that I spent on the phone, or I don’t charge for the IEP meetings, or I reviewed this report and wrote in denim and it took an hour, but I don’t want to charge people for that. And while this is… maybe it may seem kind and you’re doing clients a favor on the surface, and maybe you are, who knows, in the grand scheme of things, you are nickel and diming yourself to the point that you may get burned out or just resentful, under-appreciated, and again, underpaid.

    So charge for your time. That’s it. Charge for your time. You can have a pretty strict policy that I recommend detailing in your office policies or your consent document. For us, it means that we charge for everything in 15-minute increments, any extra activities, extra testing, anything in 15-minute increments.

    Over time, I’ve gotten pretty clear with clients that clinical activity or talking on the phone or attending meetings and things like that, anything that goes beyond the typical scope of an evaluation will be charged and let them know what the rate for that is.

    A member of one of my recent mastermind groups went even further and said that she details in her consent documents exactly what is included in the “scope of an evaluation.” Now, this might be different for different practices, whether you take insurance or do private pay, but the key theme here is that you communicate clearly what is included in the evaluation process and similarly, make it very clear what is not included in what will be charged extra for.

    A good example is, say a parent might email me and say, hey, I would love to chat just for a little bit about X diagnosis and why that might be relevant for my child. And I’ll say, “Great. Let’s schedule a time to do that. I just want to be clear that this time is billed at the typical hourly rate and we’ll bill it to your insurance if appropriate.”

    I often hear practitioners getting nickel and dimed with email time. Again, we’ve gotten pretty strict about this in our practice where if parents start down the path or adult clients start down the path of clinical emails to us, we will respond kindly but clearly, and say, this sounds really important. Let’s schedule a time to talk about this in person. So we do not do clinical stuff over email whatsoever.

    All right. So that’s the first way. You’re just undercharging. You’re not billing for the time you’re actually spending. The flip side of that is overworking. You could also call it overworking.

    The second way that you might be losing money is by under-collecting. So this really gets at your collections process. How do you keep track of the money that you’re owed and make sure that you are getting paid that money? With private practice, it can be a lot easier, a lot more straightforward. Sorry, with private pay, it can be a lot easier, more straightforward. With insurance, it gets a little more complicated because you have to track insurance aging. And there’s a lag in the payments. So you have to track that.

    This was my story very early in the practice is just being completely oblivious to the aging spreadsheets in my practice and running up a pretty big balance without knowing it over the first few years. So that’s the other piece. Under-collecting is that you’re doing the work, maybe you’re even charging for the work, but you’re just not collecting for the work.

    There might be any number of reasons for that. Maybe you feel bad. Maybe clients just don’t want to pay and they’re being obstinate. Maybe insurance isn’t paying. So there are any number of reasons, but the action item is to identify the problem in there and figure out how to solve that problem. I’ll give some ideas on how to do that here pretty soon.

    The last way that we lose money in our practices is a way that flies under the radar a bit. And this scenario is that we are doing tasks that we shouldn’t be doing. What I mean by this is engaging in those practice management tasks that you don’t get paid to do. So this will be like answering the phone, sending emails, sending out questionnaires, making copies, any number of little clerical or administrative tasks that you should not be doing. Web design, marketing, all that stuff.

    And the way that this leads to losing money is by the fact that you would not pay anyone else, any other professional, your hourly rate to do those tasks. So you are the most overpaid administrative assistant, web designer, bookkeeper, you name it. No professional in any of those fields are going to charge the same amount that you do per hour. So every hour that you spend on administrative tasks is an hour lost where you could be making your actual clinical rate.

    Let’s take a quick break to hear from our featured partner.

    Kids are experiencing trauma like never before. But how can you figure out whether they’ve been affected and how it impacts their behavior and performance at school?

    The Feifer Assessment of Childhood Trauma or the FACT is the first and only comprehensive instrument measuring how stress and trauma can impact children in a school-based setting. The FACT teacher form solicits the teacher’s perspective on the performance and behavior of children ages 4 to 18 years. It takes just 15 seconds to administer. And the available e-manual gives you detailed administration and scoring instructions. You can learn more or purchase the FACT teacher form by visiting parinc.com\fact_teacher.

    All right, let’s get back to the podcast.

    So, that’s the last way. Now the solution to that one, I’m going to go in reverse order here, the solution there is to hire help. So figure out the tasks that you need done and hire an administrative help, receptionist, web designer, marketing person, bookkeeper, whatever it may be. That will free you up to do clinical work. You will get paid more for your time and you can also just take that time off if you would like.

    As far as under-collecting, if you’re not already requiring a credit card on file, I would highly suggest that you amend your paperwork and make that simple change for 2022. It’s a very easy change to make. We have been requiring a credit card on file for at least 2 to 3 years. And it just makes things simpler.

    You also can amend your informed consent to make sure that people know exactly when their card will be charged. Make it very clear at what point during the evaluation you’ll charge. Make sure that people are aware of that. People do not like financial surprises. We’ve put it in our paperwork. We talk about it on the phone in the initial phone consultation. We talk about it during the intake. We talk about it on testing day. There are a lot of touchpoints to make sure that people are aware of the financial policies.

    Now, as far as tracking your collections, that can happen pretty easily in your EHR most of the time. I mean, almost every EHR worth its salt will, or actually every EHR worth its salt will track those numbers for you. So you should be able to track monthly or quarterly numbers in terms of gross revenue or how much you charged versus how much you were paid both from insurance and from clients. So they would be called either the patient aging statement or the insurance aging statement. And you can get a nice snapshot of exactly how much is floating out there that you have not collected based on what you have billed.

    So I would recommend getting very well acquainted with that feature in your EHR. And if you just can’t be bothered to do that, you need to hire a billing person who will do it for you. I would target a 95% collection rate between insurance and patients. Anything less is not great. Anything more is awesome. So, shoot for 95% of collections.

    Speaking of collections, let’s talk about actual collections. People tend to shy away from collections. I see a lot of questions about sending people to collections or not. We’ve been sending folks to collections in certain circumstances for at least 5 or 6 years and have thus far had, I can think of one complaint right off the top of my head. I’ll take that back. Two complaints off the top of my head. Neither of them was particularly well-founded, but people get upset with financial distress or surprises like I said.

    I would look for a collections company that is reputable, that works with medical practices, or better yet, mental health practices. And as before, the theme here is communication. So as before, I would communicate very clearly with people if and when they might be sent to collections. For us, that means, if we sent you three statements and you haven’t responded, what we do is that third statement is on pink paper. So it catches your attention. There’s a big bold statement or line on that statement that says, this is your last statement. We will send you to collections if you haven’t paid in a month.

    Now, over the course of the next month, and granted, this is all detailed in our informed consent as well. So, if the patient has not paid for the next couple of weeks after receiving their third pink statement, they get a phone call and an email just as a courtesy reminder to say, hey, we’re about two weeks out from a month going by after your last statement, you will be sent to collections if we don’t have payment by the end of this 30 day period. And so we try to give another courtesy contact to let people know. By that time, if they have not responded, they are sent to collections.

    So I would not shy away from that. There is a way to do it respectfully and politely. In our case, we make sure to offer people payment plans or to talk with them. We try to give them every opportunity to pay their bill before they go to collections, but sometimes it has to be done. You deserve to be paid. I think that’s the theme of this episode is you deserve to be paid for the work that you’re doing.

    So I hope that this has been helpful and perhaps motivated you a bit to change up some of your financial policies for the new year, or at least do an honest audit of your time and figure out how you’re spending your time and if you are charging for your time.

    The one thing that I didn’t really mention but I will briefly mention is, I know people are saying, oh, but insurance only reimburses a certain number of hours. There’s no way I can get that evaluation done in that amount of time. Well, that may be true. And you have a decision to make at that point. You have the decision to make of either working within the confines of insurance and finding a way to adapt your evaluation process to fit within those hours or continuing to work for free.

    That’s as simple as it gets. So, if you are an insurance-based testing practice and you’re in a state or an area where hours are pretty limited with specific panels, I think it’s incumbent upon us to figure out a way to fit the evaluation into those hours and communicate that to clients and be able to say, “Hey, we’ll do our best. We just don’t get reimbursed for that many hours. So here’s what that will get you. I understand if that’s frustrating. We can talk about out-of-pocket options if you would like.”

    So, short and sweet. Again, just a few things to think about on the financial side. Good luck as you work through this process and hopefully make some changes in your practice.

    So if you are a practice owner at really any stage of development, beginner, or middle or advanced where you’re starting to hire and expand your group or work on your leadership skills, there is a Testing Psychologist Mastermind Group for you. So these are group coaching experiences where you get accountability, vicarious learning, and focused support from the group on the concerns relevant to your stage of development. You can get more information at thetestingpsychologist.com/consulting and book a pre-group call to talk with me about whether it would be a good fit.

    All right, y’all. I hope everyone is doing well. I’ll look forward to talking to you next time.

    The information contained in this podcast and on The Testing Psychologist website is intended for informational and educational purposes only. Nothing in this podcast or on the website is intended to be a substitute for professional, psychological, psychiatric, or medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment.

    Please note that no doctor-patient relationship is formed here. And similarly, no supervisory or consultative relationship is formed between the host or guests of this podcast and listeners of this podcast. If you need the qualified advice of any mental health practitioner or medical provider, please seek one in your area. Similarly, if you need supervision on clinical matters, please find a supervisor with expertise that fits your needs.

    Click here to listen instead!

  • 255. Holiday Hopes #5: Collections

    255. Holiday Hopes #5: Collections

    Would you rather read the transcript? Click here.

    Welcome to the Holiday Hopes series! Holiday Hopes is a seven-part series to carry you through the next several weeks. Each episode will focus on one aspect of your practice that you might aspire to change in the new year. By the end of the series, you could potentially make significant changes in nearly all areas of your practice!

    This fifth episode in the series is all about making sure that you’re collecting on the money that you’re charging. What better time to revise your financial policies than the new year? Here are a few ideas that I’ll discuss today:

    • The three ways you’re losing money in your practice
    • Keeping credit cards on file
    • Tracking collections in your EHR

    Cool Things Mentioned

    Featured Resource

    I am honored to partner with PAR for 2021 to bring you featured items from their catalog! Listen to each episode for specific product recommendations and links. Learn more at www.parinc.com.

    The Testing Psychologist podcast is approved for CEU’s!

    I’ve partnered with At Health to offer CE credits for podcast episodes! Visit this link to access current and past episodes available for CE credit. You can use code “TTP10” for a discount on ALL the course credits you purchase from At Health!

    About Dr. Jeremy Sharp

    I’m a licensed psychologist and Clinical Director at the Colorado Center for Assessment & Counseling, a private practice that I founded in 2009 and have grown to over 20 clinicians. I earned my undergraduate degree in Experimental Psychology from the University of South Carolina before getting my Master’s and PhD in Counseling Psychology from Colorado State University. These days, I specialize in psychological and neuropsychological evaluation with kids and adolescents.

    As the host of the Testing Psychologist Podcast, I provide private practice consulting for psychologists and other mental health professionals who want to start or grow psychological testing services in their practices. I live in Fort Collins, Colorado with my wife (also a therapist) and two young kids.

    Ready to grow your testing services? Click below to schedule a complimentary 30-minute pre-consulting call!

    [x_button shape=”square” size=”large” float=”none” href=”https://app.acuityscheduling.com/schedule.php?owner=13476033&appointmentType=2843005″ target=”blank” info=”none” info_place=”top” info_trigger=”hover”]Schedule Your Call[/x_button]

  • 254 Transcript

    Dr. Sharp: Hello, everyone. Welcome to The Testing Psychologist podcast, the podcast where we talk all about the business and practice of psychological and neuropsychological assessment. I’m your host, Dr. Jeremy Sharp, licensed psychologist, group practice owner, and private practice coach.

    This episode is brought to you by PAR. PAR has recently released the Feifer Assessment of Childhood Trauma or the FACT, the first and only comprehensive instrument measuring how stress and trauma can impact children in a school-based setting. You can learn more or purchase the FACT teacher form by visiting parinc.com\fact_teacher.

    All right, y’all, welcome back. Glad to be here. And I’m glad to have my guest today who is a return guest. Dr. Celine Saulnier is a licensed clinical psychologist that specializes in diagnostic evaluations of autism spectrum and related disorders across the lifespan. She spent the first 20 years of her career in academia conducting research on early detection of autism and adaptive behavior profiles at the Yale Child Study Center and Emory University School of Medicine. In 2018, she opened her own practice, Neurodevelopmental Assessment & Consulting Services in Decatur, Georgia where she has a private practice and continues to consult on research projects and works with individuals in her private practice. She has published numerous papers, written two books, and is an author on the Vineland Adaptive Behaviour Scales third edition.

    We talk a lot about adaptive functioning today. That is our topic. Celine and I get into a number of topics related to adaptive functioning. We talk about the history of adaptive functioning assessment. We talk about different means of assessing adaptive functioning in terms of the interview versus questionnaire, why she prefers the interview. We talk about reconciling discrepancies between IQ and adaptive functioning and numerous other topics that I think will be interesting and applicable to your practice.

    Speaking of your practice, the next cohort of the Advanced Practice Mastermind is almost full. It will be starting in mid-January. I think at this point we have 4 or 5 out of 6 spots taken. So, if you’re an advanced practice owner, that means you are a group practice, you have employees or contractors, you are looking to grow, you’re trying to manage your folks, trying to step back from your own clinical work, establish better systems, that sort of thing, this could be a good group for you. You can learn more at thetestingpsychologist.com/advanced and schedule a pre-group call to see if it’s a good fit. I’d love to have you.

    All right. Let’s get to my conversation with Dr. Celine Saulnier.

    Hey, Celine, welcome back to the podcast.

    Dr. Celine: Thanks so much. I’m so happy to be here.

    Dr. Sharp: I’m happy to have you. I’m always amazed when people come back a second time and it’s like, oh, I guess the first time wasn’t that bad. That’s great. 

    Dr. Celine: I love it. There’s just so much to talk about and it’s just so easy to chat with you.

    Dr. Sharp: Well, thanks. Likewise. You have your hands in so many things I feel like in our field, but the two main areas, the first one you talked about autism when you were on two years ago, I think, and now we’re dipping into this other area that you have spent a lot of time and energy on, which is adaptive functioning. So, I am curious as always, of all the things that you could be doing and spending time on within our field, why do you focus all this time and energy on adaptive functioning, in particular?

    Dr. Celine: I sort of fell into it. In grad school, my dissertation required me to do probably 300 Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales. So I got to know the measure very well. And then, following my graduate degree, I went to the Yale Child Study Center as my post-doc. So it was literally coming off my dissertation. I enter where Sarah Sparrow, author of the Vineland is working.

    My mentor at the time, Ami Klin was like, you’re now an adaptive behavior maven. I’m going to connect you with Sarah Sparrow and her husband Domenic Cicchetti who’s a biostatistician. They were both at Yale. And that’s how it began. We started doing some studies together.  Working with them was an absolutely incredible experience.

    Dr. Sharp: Can you think back to that time when you say it was an incredible experience? I think a lot of us, well, we have varying experiences with mentors and advisors and PIs, and so forth. So, what was so incredible about working with them?

    Dr. Celine: So, Dom and Sarah never had children of their own. So I imagine that they just took on their students and mentees like their adopted children. And so, all I remember is their love for wine more than anything. So going to an APA conference in Hawaii, literally they’re like, okay, we’re going to have a chat about a child behavior in this project in our hotel room.

    So I go over to their hotel rooms, sprawled out on a bed was a suitcase just with their wine. And they had glassware everything, and they would only travel with wines they chose because they were such exquisite wines. So you were probably thinking, I was going to tell you something about adaptive behavior and academics, but you know what was so incredible about them was just how personable they were. And that’s an example of it.

    And then Sarah would throw annual Thanksgiving parties and parties for her psychology students that I heard about in the past. So just things like that.

    Dr. Sharp: That’s great. I mean, we can talk about the academic rigor and any number of things in that vein, but it’s the humanizing that really makes a difference. I don’t know, for me, at least. There’s that relationship and like you said, personability.

    Dr. Celine: Yeah, she was wonderful. And just things about in my training, the way she would go about talking about adaptive behavior just always stuck with me. She developed it as an interview. And it should always be conducted as an interview when you’re assessing adaptive behavior. And how you do these interactions with caregivers so that you’re getting the best amount of information that you can. So just even that type of mentorship has stuck with me.

    Dr. Sharp: Sure. Well, I think we’re going to get into some of those topics here during our conversation. Certainly ,the interview versus questionnaire format is a big one that I would love to talk about.

    I am curious. I would love to lay a little bit of groundwork. And speaking of someone who’s not an expert in this area by any means, I wonder if you could just give us a little bit of background on the study of adaptive functioning and  why… Why is this important is the question because in my mind, and I’m just going to be transparent here, it’s like adaptive functioning measures these behaviors that sort of fade into the background or maybe they are subsumed in other questionnaires. They’re just these behaviors that it’s easy to overlook and it seems like those are just what we do from day to day. It’s not symptomatic necessarily. So anyway, that’s a long rambling.

    Dr. Celine:  Well, you know, that’s exactly it. They are everyday practical behaviors. And that’s why they fall into the background. It’s we take them for granted because we just are applying them every day. They are literally defined as self-sufficient skills. So the difference is, even though they overlap with, let’s say, developmental cognitive speech and language skills, it’s not your capacity of them. It’s not that you have the ability to perform the behavior. It’s that you actually do perform the behavior. So that’s a subtle difference in typical development, but in these different neurodevelopmental disorders, it’s a big difference.

    For autism, for example, you can have the capacity to speak and have hundreds of words in your repertoire, but you can’t put even two words together functionally or meaningfully to say, hi, how are you? Nice to meet you. Or mom, I love you. So that’s the functional application. So it’s the difference.

    And the way Sarah Sparrow taught it to me was cognition is the can do, adaptive behavior is the does do. We know does do means without any prompts, supports, reminders or help, It’s complete independence and self-sufficiency

    Dr. Sharp: Right. I like that distinction. That’s very simple and very easy to understand, but very descriptive. Can you speak to when this started to become a thing that we were concerned about in our field. Has it always been present as a part of evaluations or?

    Dr. Celine: If we open the history books of cognition and intelligence testing, dating back to the early 1900s, everything was focused on IQ. And it was Edgar Dahl that actually developed one of the first measures of adaptive behavior. And it was in Vineland, New Jersey called the Vineland Social Maturity Scale. And that would evolve into the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales with Sara Sparrow.

    But in the early 1900, when you think of all of our diagnostic systems, the DSM, but then there is what’s now AAIDD which used to be the American Association for Mental Deficiency and then Mental Retardation, everything was defined by what was intellectual disability, the deficiency of time, mental retardation at the time. There were two areas of deficit, cognition and these real-life practical skills called adaptive behavior.

    So no matter where you look, those are the two criteria. So we needed standardized assessments for both. It’s just that we have always had these IQ tests as long as we can remember, from the early 1900s and even before. It’s just there weren’t as many adaptive behavior measures. And so, the Vineland, the one that Sara and Dom revised, and it was published in 1984, when you think of it, 1984 is really late when you think about the early cognitive measures, but I would say the Vineland is probably the most widely used measure worldwide in the Adaptive Behavior Assessment System, the ABAS.

    Dr. Sharp: Right. And now, I don’t know if we… Well, we haven’t talked about this so far, but I’m sure it’s in the introduction, but then you have jumped in and played a big role in the newest version, right?

    Dr. Celine: So that their addition to the Vineland, I should actually have made that disclosure when I’m talking about it being the most widely used measure, I do have to disclose that I’m an author on it and receive royalties from it. But that happened because I was working with Sarah and Dom at Yale and I was at Yale for nine years. In 2010, my mentor, Ami Klin was in discussion with people in Atlanta to relocate to Emory University. And that’s how I got to Atlanta.

    So around 2010 when we were discussing this, just completely unexpectedly, Sara Sparrow passed away. She had a heart issue. And she passed away very suddenly. And because Ami Klin was so close to her and her family, he was with her in the hospital. And unbeknownst to me, she said to him, I want Celine to carry on the Vineland after I’m gone. That blew me away. I was not expecting that at all. And it just so happened that 2010 was when Sara and Dom had just started discussions with Pearson about the revision into the third edition. So I started with the revision from the beginning on and then Domenic Cicchetti got pretty sick after his wife died. And then he ended up passing away in 2018 or 2019.

    So now I’m the only living author of the Vineland, which is a huge honor yet in a way, a burden to carry on a legacy. It’s a good burden, but…

    Dr. Sharp: But a burden on the last. That seems like a lot of responsibility for lack of a better word to describe that. Anyway, that’s a whole other set of questions and what happens in the future and what the direction might be. Maybe we’ll save that for a little bit later.

    I would love to dig into adaptive functioning a little bit more though and what this looks like. We gave a little bit of a definition earlier in terms of these day-to-day behaviors and what you can or could do versus can-do. Anything else that you would add to just a working definition of adaptive functioning that we should know about?

    Dr. Celine: Yeah. So when you were thinking these, they’re such broad skills, right? So most adaptive measures have a conceptual. The Vineland has communication. The ABAS has conceptual. These are the closest coming to academic or cognitive, right? You’re receptive and expressive language. You’ve written communication skills, numerical skills, but then you have your motor skills. Then you have your daily living skills, your personal care. How do I dress, bathe, toileting, all of that, and your domestic- how do I do chores and cooking and cleaning and how do I go out in the community? And then you have your socialization and interaction skills. So these are so broad, right?

    And the thing that’s nice about adaptive skills is they’re very discrete behaviors. So if you don’t have one and you need it, you can be taught it to your mental capacity to be taught it and then you have it. So adaptive behavior can change quickly over time for better, for worse. Intervention can make it improve. Lack of intervention can make a decrease. That’s why these measures are very useful as outcome measures in clinical trials. Patient is relatively stable. He won’t probably see movement in like a 12-week trial, but you could see movement in adaptive behavior over that short amount of time.

    Dr. Sharp: Right. I guess I didn’t think about that application, but that makes a lot of sense that they would use adaptive functioning as an outcome measure. Yeah, certainly.

    Let’s see. We can dive into the different areas, but I’m honestly curious about the role in different diagnoses and certainly in intellectual disability and the change from DSM-IV to DSM-V to put a pretty heavy emphasis on adaptive functioning. Maybe we go that direction. I’m not sure what the question in there is. It’s more just the reflection that we did move to this model where adaptive functioning is more prominent, right? 

    Dr. Celine: I’m so glad they did because it just makes it so much more applicable to treatment and translating to how much support does this individual needs because of their disability and that’s adaptive behavior, right? Self-sufficiency and independence. And everyone has their own personal level of what that self-sufficiency will be.

    In autism, for example, there are profiles of adaptive behavior where understandably socialization skills are the lowest because it’s a social disability and that adaptive skills tend to fall far below IQ or cognitive expectations, let alone age expectations. And that’s because of this sort of, for whatever reason, individuals across the spectrum have difficulty intrinsically knowing how to apply their skills functionally. And so, that’s something that helps in the diagnostic process. So now it’s standard practice to include assessment of adaptive behavior in an evaluation for autism.

    And then you can see profiles like that in ADHD and genetic disorders. Whereas an intellectual disability, by definition, you have delays in both cognition and adaptive behavior, but you would expect those two to be on par with one another. So if someone is 10 years old and they’re functioning at a 7-year mental age because of their cognitive delays, then you would expect that their adaptive skills are also delayed, but also at about a7 year mental age, whereas in autism, if you have a 10-year-old with the same cognitive delay mentally at about a 7 year level, their socialization skills are going to be far lower, like at a 2 or 3-year level. And that’s how we diagnose. We start to piece things together.

    And so, when I go to make recommendations, I would much rather have the benchmarks be about specific areas of need rather than an IQ number. So moderate intellectual disability means they need this amount of support and conceptual development and practical skills in socialization rather than it’s an IQ of 47. You’ll figure it out.

    Mark Tassé has an amazing paper that he literally goes through all the benchmarks and gives you explicit criteria across conceptual daily living skills and socialization, mild, moderate, severe, and profound ID, and actually gives examples of what amount of support you would need based on that. So, that kind of depth should actually be included in our diagnostic systems to help us as clinicians, right?

    Dr. Sharp: Yeah. What was his name again?

    Dr. Celine: Mark Tassé, and it’s T-A-S-S-E with the

    Dr. Sharp: thing?

    Dr. Celine: French.

    Dr. Sharp: Yeah, the accent

    Dr. Celine: You’re testing my vocabulary here.

    Dr. Sharp: Oh gosh. Yeah, mine too. I feel like I’m losing more and more of my vocabulary as I get older. I just want to put that in the show notes so people can come and look at it.

    Dr. Celine: I’ll email you the article so you have it. In that way, people have the reference.

    Dr. Sharp: Great, thank you. Well, you brought up two things within that that I would love to ask about. I think they both revolve around discrepancy between IQ and adaptive scores in both directions. I feel like we have… I’ve seen a lot of clients where IQ is relatively low, and certainly falls in the range for ID, but adaptive scores are relatively high. They’re low average, maybe average. So that’s one example. And then the other example is the one you mentioned for IQ might be relatively high, but adaptive functioning is relatively low.

    I’m curious how you clinically conceptualize both of those, but then how you might explain those situations to parents as well, or caregivers who are curious about that discrepancy. So there’s a lot wrapped up in that question.

    Dr. Celine: Yeah. I’ll start with what I prefer to see. I prefer to see adaptive skills higher than mental age. That’s because you know that person is exceeding their capacity. So think about whenever you go to the grocery store or Starbucks, anywhere out in the community and you see someone with a disability, Down Syndrome, whatever, and they have some form of cognitive delay, but they are working, they’re living independently, they’re getting married, they’re having children and families and they’re just fine. That’s what we want. That’s what’s optimal outcome, right? That’s all adaptive behavior.

    Whereas on the flip side, you have in the autism field, the vast majority of autistic individuals, autistic adults have no cognitive impairment and no language impairment yet they are failing to achieve levels of independence. They’re not holding down jobs. They’re not living independently and they’re not sustaining successful relationships. And that’s because of their poor adaptive functioning.

    So, it’s so critical to me as an outcome measure of both, whether or not a clinical trial is effective, but if life is successful and meaningful. So that was the whole premise going back to early 1900 of Edgar Dahl’s research was, the importance of self-sufficiency and why the social competence or competence in general, is so meaningful to one’s contribution to society.

    Dr. Sharp: Yes. So, a dumb question from that.

    Dr. Celine: There are no dumb questions.

    Dr. Sharp: Thank you. We’ll see after I ask the question. So, what can account for that? How is that possible that someone can overperform their “IQ”? And this is honestly a purposefully naive question, but  I want to make it explicit. How can someone outperform their IQ and conversely not perform up to their IQ? Yes, I’ll just leave it there and let you take it wherever you’d like to take it.

    Dr. Celine: Oh boy! Don’t I wish I had the answers to both those questions, right? So starting with the ones who outperform their IQ. Maybe that’s a testament to the faultiness in our IQ measures. Maybe we’re not really getting at the true capacity of some individuals. It might be the clinicians. Maybe there was something in their assessment that didn’t get the true capacity or the environmental factors. It was noisy, it was hot, they were tired, whatever.

    But at the same time, some of these skills, like my IQ is 60, but how does that play into the fact that I can or can’t brush my teeth? How those interplay, I just really don’t know. And so, if you teach someone by breaking it down like this is how you do it and then someone can do it, I think those teaching methods can work at many levels. Even for some people who are severely and profoundly affected, they can still learn. If we break things down so concretely, we can teach them at their ability to understand what we’re teaching them.

    On the flip side, in autism, there are so many factors and more likely unknown factors that are contributing to why there are those discrepancies. Executive functioning is probably a huge factor that everything about executing something in life is all about planning, organization, understanding what’s meaningful versus less salient, holistic processing, working memory, all of that kind of stuff is executive functioning, which are also incredibly impaired in autism.

    So Lauren Kenworthy at National Children’s, she’s the one who does all the research on executive functioning and adaptive behavior deficits across disabilities. So that interplay, I think, plays a really significant role.

    Dr. Sharp: Absolutely. Yeah, it’s a complicated question. I was hoping that you might have the answer.

    Dr. Celine: I’m sorry.

    Dr. Sharp: No, it’s totally okay. It is complicated. But it’s one of those things in our field I think that we just continue to wrestle with. And it circles back to my question of how to explain some of these differences to different stakeholders in the evaluation process, whether it’s parents or for us, it’s a lot of community center board, applications for services where community center boards may say, well, their IQ is really high, so they don’t qualify for services, and we’re like, but the adaptive is very low.

    Dr. Celine: Every time I give a presentation. The week before Thanksgiving, I was giving a two-day talk in Lancaster, I mispronounce it, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, and said this exact same thing. I don’t make friends when I promote this into school systems or with parents but do away with the focus on academics in a way like in the field of autism, my focus is, is this person going to live up to their potential?

    Academically they’re likely doing fine. So I’m not going to focus on their academics. I’m going to inundate them with adaptive skills, social skills, functional real-life skills, their whole time in the educational system when they have an IEP, because that’s the only time. When they transition into adulthood, it’s a big, giant black hole.

    And so, we need to really lean on IDEA because if you read the law, it says that it’s beyond academic. It’s being able to have adaptive and social functioning as well to meet the needs of society. So we just have to focus on that aspect of the law and say that these educational curricula need to be more flexible, that you have to have the life skills track that is usually for the low performing grade-wise students, unfortunately, and then you have your AP and IB tracks and everyone for the academically inclined. And these two are parallel. They don’t intertwine.

    We need to allow the autistic individuals that are in the AP classes and the IB classes to take the life skills program and vice versa. Our school systems don’t work like that. They’re rigid. They’re like, Nope, it has to be one or the other and families are like, Nope, I want my kid to go to college and they won’t get into college if they’re taking Home-Ec. Well, they’re not going to get the answer they want to hear from me.

    Dr. Sharp: Right. Where else do these skills come from if it’s not coming from school?

    Dr. Celine: Then families are paying out of pocket unless you happen to have community programming that offers these services for free, which are few and far between where they’re going to do life, coaching, job coaching, social skills instruction, all of that kind of stuff. It’s not going to happen. Families who have means can go and pay for all of those private services, but most families can’t. 

    Dr. Sharp: Right. So then we’re back to this question of how you talk with different entities about the results from the adaptive functioning assessment and parents who might say, well, his IQ is so high, why is this adaptive functioning so low or a similar situation?

    Let’s take a quick break to hear from our featured partner.

    Kids are experiencing trauma like never before. But how can you figure out whether they’ve been affected and how it impacts their behavior and performance at school?

    The Feifer Assessment of Childhood Trauma or the FACT is the first and only comprehensive instrument measuring how stress and trauma can impact children in a school-based setting. The FACT teacher form solicits the teacher’s perspective on the performance and behavior of children ages 4 to 18 years. It takes just 15 seconds to administer. And the available e-manual gives you detailed administration and scoring instructions. You can learn more or purchase the FACT teacher form by visiting parinc.com\fact_teacher.

    All right, let’s get back to the podcast.


    Dr. Celine: Every time I write my report, it’s exhaustive when you read my adaptive write-up because I’ll say, despite the fact that so-and-so’s cognition is this high, the fact that their adaptive skills are falling so below their age and cognitive expectations is the focus of what we need to have as our priority. And this is common in autism.

    And I’ll even if I have to cite references of all the poor outcomes and adulthood, like this is the path that we’re on unless you start closing this gap. And the only way to close this gap is to foster the adaptive skills and stop focusing on the cognition because the cognition’s going on an upward incline, standard scores are commensurate with chronological development. So, they’re doing just fine, whereas adaptive skills because they’re not focused on, the listeners can’t see my hands, but the adaptive widens with age. And that’s just the common path. Not only in autism. ADHD has that common path. Some genetic disorders have that common path.

    So  I think the more and more we as clinicians can emphasize that in our reports and our write-ups and make our recommendations about what’s functional and adaptive, it’s our job to educate and inform. Then we can make a difference in that way.

    Dr. Sharp: Certainly. Maybe we dig into that for just a bit in how recommendations might be tailored to match adaptive functioning assessment. I know it’s putting the cart before the horse a little bit, but it’s right here in front of us. So, can we go in that direction? So what do you mean when you say that when we try to tailor recommendations to the adaptive functioning level?

    Dr. Celine: If I have, let’s say a teenager who’s in high school and already by the law, we’re supposed to be focusing on transition. Everything that I’m recommending is about life skills, life coaching, job coaching, vocational training, whatever that person’s path is. Are they going to post-secondary education, then we’re going to inundate them with those supports, but they’re going to be living on a college campus, or are they going to be having to function independently to some degree?

    So, I’ll have those recommendations. Sometimes I’ll be recommending a transitional program that they’re not ready. No one has worked on these skills, so they can’t go to college. There’ll be another statistic of the person dropping out of college because they can’t navigate a college campus independently. So a transitional program where they go to 1 to 2 years where all of that stuff is done in house, the life, coaching, job coaching, et cetera.

    For younger kids, I am literally taking the results of the adaptive assessment which are behaviors. Does not initiate conversations. It’s not uncommon in developmental disabilities to not be toilet trained, to not have any kind of dressing skills or the motor skills to fasten and fasteners, those types of skills.

    I will take every single skill, every item on the test that the individual score is zero where they’re supposed to be at a 2 based on their mental age. I do it by mental age because I’m not going to go to chronological age if they have a cognitive delay. But I will list all of the items by area. I’ll say, here are all the communication behaviors. Here are all the daily living skills and personal care. And here are all the socialization. Here are the motor.

    And it’s your job as the family and school to prioritize these behaviors and put them in the IEP, because I only have met this individual for like a day, whereas you know them day in, day out. So what’s the priority? A family could say toilet training’s at the top of my priority where another family could say, no, speaking is at the top of my hierarchy. So I can’t make that decision. That’s for the people who know this individual the most. So I’m literally focusing on just entering those behaviors and having everyone work on them to foster them, teach them explicitly and then foster them in real life.

    And then one thing that you’re making me think of that we didn’t talk about are elevated adaptive scores. If I see a child who has extremely high adaptive skills, that raises a red flag for me too, because you don’t want an 8 year old, why should they have adaptive skills like that of an 18-year-old? They shouldn’t be out in the community by themselves alone. They shouldn’t be driving a car. A 5-year-old shouldn’t be cooking dinner. So these are behaviors that I think, are we looking at a parental child or did someone do the assessment the wrong way? Did whoever was the respondent not understand the nature of the test? So that alway raises a red flag for me as well.

    Dr. Sharp: That’s such a good point. I would not have thought of those possibilities necessarily. When we see exaggerated, or maybe just high adaptive scores compared to what we think the kid might be capable of, we always have a conversation with the parents around, how did you answer these questions? Did you answer these questions based on what your kid can do with a little bit of help from you or totally independently? Because that’s a big difference. We find a lot of parents, they have an investment in their kids being able to do well and to be capable. And whether that’s conscious or unconscious, it can influence their answers sometimes.

    Dr. Celine:  Well, this is why the interview is so important because it’s to no fault of their own if you gave me a rating scale and just said, go home and answer these 300 questions about all of these skills and no matter what you do, think about what your child actually does with no support, not what they can do. Any parent, any human being is after page 5 and 175 items later will be like, oh, can my kid do this? Yeah, I think they can. And they just score it.

    So if I am doing that on my, I always throw my daughter under the bus here because it’s true. If my 13-year-old daughter brush her teeth, like if I saw that item and say, oh can my 13-year-old daughter brush her teeth, of course, she can, I’m going to give full credit. But now, there’s a clinician sitting across from me and says, wait a minute, Celine, you just said that your daughter can brush her teeth. About what percentage of the time does she actually do that without any prompt, supports, reminders or help from you? And then I think of every single day when I’m chasing her around the house with the toothbrush and the toothpaste, until I physically get them both in her hands and then physically push her hands into her own mouth, her teeth are never getting brushed.

    So just by the nature of someone, they are interviewing me to correct me, you’ve gotten the accurate response. So that’s why rating scales tend to be inflated by 5 to 10 points as compared to the interview.

    Dr. Sharp: That’s interesting. I’ve not heard that statistic before. So is that specific to adaptive functioning measures or to the Vineland?

    Dr. Celine: Yes. So, for example, if you look at the Vineland-3 standardization sample and you look at those who administered the interview and also the parent caregiver rating form, they did that validity test, the parent/caregiver rating form in some age levels and some clinical samples is higher.

    Dr. Sharp: And that’s a significant difference, I would imagine. I mean, 5 to 10 points, especially…

    Dr. Celine: Yeah. And the interview, if you actually do statistics using like Cronbach’s alpha, and this is all Domenic Cicchetti’s work and Pearson’s statistics work that the higher the statistic, the more the item differentiates the clinical group from the normative sample and the interviews, all their numbers are higher than the parent caregiver rating form. So the behaviors are better distinguishing between clinical groups if you’re doing the interview.

    Dr. Sharp: Right. Let’s talk logistics then, because I would imagine a lot of people are saying like, oh my gosh, when can I fit this into my evaluation process? It’s another interview. How long does it take? What recommendations do you have for folks in terms of integrating the interview into the evaluation?

    Dr. Celine: I’m not going to lie and say that it’s so easy to administer. The Vineland takes an hour to an hour and a half to administer. It will say 40 to 45 minutes, but that’s if you’re a really good administrator and you reign in chatty parents and you have a young kid or an individual that doesn’t have many skills.

    The older the individual, the broader the range of skills, the longer the interview is going to take. And now put in a […] and it can go on and on and on. So you need to be trained in how to conduct the interview. You don’t have to have a specific degree to conduct. Anyone can learn to conduct an interview. It’s just knowing how to do it. Do not ask leading Yes/ No questions. To be broad about what you’re asking. I always like to ask, about what percentage of the time? That’s open-ended.

    Pearson has been great. They have recorded my webinars. So if you go to Vineland-3 page, you can look up the webinars and they’re already prerecorded like an overview of how to administer the Vineland-3. Vineland-3 on adaptive profiles and autism, and then adaptive profiles and neurodevelopmental disorders. They’re all there. And so, it’s not even like you would have to have formal training, but I that’s what I do in my consulting. I do Vineland training all the time, especially for clinical trials where the raters do need to be reliable with one another.

    Dr. Sharp: Of course. Are you doing the Vineland right off the bat? Is it packaged along at the same time as the intake interview? Or is it a separate appointment? I’m always curious about the concrete practicalities of something like this.

    Dr. Celine: It’s different. Pre-COVID, when I would invite families to my office just to do clinical interviews, which post COVID I’ll probably never do again, why do I need to have someone physically come to my office just to do an interview? I would do back-to-back my developmental and diagnostic history and my Vineland together. And that would be on a separate day than I did the direct testing.

    When I was part of a multidisciplinary team, and for those of you who have that luxury, it would be the same day. While one clinician is testing the child, the other clinician is doing the developmental history and the Vineland with the parent.

    Dr. Sharp: Yes, that’s fair. I think people are always interested in the timing and allocation of time and all that stuff.

    Dr. Celine:  Sometimes what I’ll do is, because I am so familiar with the Vineland and adaptive profiles and can literally look at a score sheet and then be able to relay the feedback right away, if I do my feedback session the day following my testing. I need that time to score the cognitive and all of the direct testing. That takes a long time.

    But the Vineland, if I’m doing the interview online, like I’m sitting with my parents who I’m about to give feedback to, and I have my iPad and I do the interview with them, I literally hit score report and it’s there for me within five seconds. I have the printout. So sometimes I do that and then just go right into feedback because now that was the last piece of information I needed. I have the parent there for feedback without the child. And so I can just incorporate that right then and there. That’s another way to do it. It doesn’t add too much time to the feedback day. 

    Dr. Sharp: Sure. Are there any situations where you choose to administer the questionnaire versus the interview or would advise that people do a questionnaire versus an interview? Is that ever before preferable?

    Dr. Celine: Of course. And now I have to say, Sarah, I’m so sorry because she’s rolling over in her grave. But yes, of course, especially during COVID. At the beginning of COVID, we all had to just shift and do whatever we could do to survive. But when I send my email to parents, Q-global generates its own stock email. I have a revised template that I have underlined, bold, “With complete independence, I want you to be thinking about every single behavior. Your child’ is not expected to be performing every single behavior asked this measure self-sufficiency. I really want you to be thinking about independence without supports, without reminders, prompts, help.”

    And so, I inundating them with that information. And I feel when I’m getting the results, you know, as a clinician it’s like, oh, this doesn’t match everything else. I felt confident enough when I give that amount of instruction to the family. I’m getting better results, more accurate results.

    Dr. Sharp: Sure. Yeah. So, it’s sort of like, okay, there are situations where this can be fine with the asterisks?

    Dr. Celine: With the asterisks. Yeah. And I might even go over it with them. I see a lot of adults in my practice that don’t live with someone. So I have to give them the ABAS because the Vineland does not have a self-report. The ABAS does. So I’ll give the same instructions. I don’t give the instructions that come with WPS’s computer printout. I modify it.

    And then sometimes I’ll sit with them and go through the items. Like, let’s talk about this. You said that you do this with complete independence. Sometimes it’s the complete opposite. You said that you don’t do this, but I’ve met you and I’ve seen you perform this behavior. So let’s talk about the frequency with which, or not with which you do this on a daily basis, because it just seems incongruent. In that way, you’d like to have the results ahead of time so you can eyeball them.

    So if I am going to give the rating scale, give it ahead of time so that you have the time to eyeball it before you actually see the parent again to go over things or the individual.

    Dr. Sharp: Yeah. I just want to use that opportunity to highlight how important that is. I think across the board with rating scales or questionnaires that… I mean, I know we do it. I know we all do it. You know, where you get the questionnaire back and you’re trying to scramble and get the results together, and you look at the scores and you’re like, okay, this looks good. But if you have the luxury to dig into those items and really look in detail, it can be so helpful to catch discrepancies or get more information. There’ve been so many times when I look at any number of questionnaires and just think, this does not make any sense. I need to get more information here. 

    So I want to give you a little opportunity to highlight the Vineland a little a bit. We’ve done the disclosure. You are an author. We know this. With that in mind, I also trust you to be as objective as possible. People often say, why would I choose the Vineland over the ABAS or vice versa? So in your mind, are there major differences? If so, what are they? Let’s start there.

    Dr. Celine: Well, so the Vineland was considered the “gold standard”, and we can argue that term all we want, long before I was a part of it. It was being used worldwide and translated in who knows how many languages way before my involvement. And so, I just jumped on the Vineland train and it’s thankfully, still

    I think regarded as one of the gold standards.

    So I truly believe having now done all the research and being immersed in the history of the Vineland and adaptive behavior, that it was truly a construct that was developed to be assessed by a third party respondent through an interview. Edgar Dahl felt that way and Sara Sparrow felt that way. And so, I try to stay true to that because when you’re doing the interview, I’m getting a lot more clinical information than just what I need for their adaptive functioning. When we think about the whole comprehensive evaluation for whatever we’re doing. So I just find that that’s really critically important.

    Also, if you look at the standardization, the way Pearson has standardized the Vineland is very close to the US census, as far as race, race, ethnicity, socio-economic demographics, whereas the competitors don’t even come close. When you look at how does this match? It does not even come close. So in that regard, I would say it is above and beyond.

    Dr. Sharp: That’s great. These are important factors as we know. So I appreciate you doing that. I know that’s a somewhat awkward place. You don’t want to talk about your own measure, but there are some things to highlight there.

    What about things under the surface of the Vineland? I think we all know the basics and certainly the sub-scales and the composites and that sort of thing, but are there any hidden secrets of the Vineland, things that it can be super useful, or things we might miss without doing a real deep dive into it?

    Dr. Celine: So right off the bat, I don’t think that they’re secret, but the reports that you can print out, you can get multi-rater reports. So you can compare across two raters. I’m hoping to change that with the Vineland-4 that there can be more than two raters. But then you can do progress reports across five-time points. So if you are in a school system and you have the same child year after year, but even multiple time points a year shows progress in their IEP. That’s data you can give. And then that’s how clinical trials can also track progress.

    There is a score called the Growth Scale Value, a GSB score, that’s not specific to the Vineland. It’s just new to the Vineland-3. The Bayley has had a GSB score as well. It tells you across time points what growth is significant or not. So you can then again, then this must be meaningful change over time. Otherwise, it’s probably just a random change. And so, it’s based on raw scores and not standard scores.

    And if you think about developmental disabilities, even after a year’s time, you might never see movement in the standards score because of the nature of the disability. Even if someone makes the exact same amount of growth as expected for their chronological age, their standard score is not going to change. The growth scale value shows you change based on raw score for movement, which is much more informative from an intervention perspective. So that’s just a click that you make in Q-global.  I want the multi-rater report with the GSV score and there you have it.

    There’s also an intervention guidance where you can see by every single behavior, every single item, how they cluster by topic area. So you can see that like in the written domain, it was all of his reading items that were low. So now we know we have a recommendation for reading. So it helps you out in that regard.

    And let’s see what other gems. The Vineland-3 came out with a brief version called the domain level. And it’s literally that instead of the domain and then the 11 subdomains, it’s only the domains, communication, socialization, daily living skills, and motor. Motor is always optional. It’s much less items and it’s really used just for determining eligibility. So if you’re a psychologist that is doing all of these eligibility assessments and you just need to do something quick, like you’re doing a brief intelligence measure, you need a brief adaptive measure. This is how you pair it.

    But again, BRIEF measures tend to inflate scores. So that would also be something to consider. Like if you have someone that you think is in the mild to borderline cognitive range, I would say give the comprehensive versus the domain level because you don’t want to overinflate something that shows their adaptive score to be 80, rather than 72, where you could make the argument that this is mild ID, right?

    Dr. Sharp: Right. Those are great. Some of those I was not aware of. I appreciate that.

    Let’s see. We’re bouncing around, but that’s okay. I’ll trust people to be able to follow all this info. Any tips for the interview that you have found over the years to help you gather the information that you need, keep it on track, handle delicate situations where caregivers might be upset or emotions come into the room?

    Dr. Celine: Oh, definitely. I’ll start with that one first, always change the starting age to the mental age estimate because you can upset parents. It will always default in the computer to their chronological age. And if you have someone who’s very, very impaired mentally, non-verbal, every single question you’re asking them, they’re like, no, my kid doesn’t do that. No, my kid doesn’t do that. And then they start crying because they’re like, everything is negative. So start with the lower developmental items where their child does actually do it.

    Then use words like, how about dressing? Let’s talk about dressing. Tell me about your child’s dressing rather than does your child dress themselves, because then you’re asking a yes or no question. And we’re always going to default to can. Can your child do this? So, avoid can. Just every time you hear yourself say can he know that you’re asking the wrong question? Even the does he is still a leading question because you want it to be open-ended, but does he is better than can he or she.

    And then with reigning in parents, I’m going to get to that just a little bit. That’s such a good point. I’m going to get to. Even if you don’t get to it, there are so many other behaviors they’ll forget about. We’ll all forget about it after 15 more minutes. Just say, oh yeah, I’m going to ask you about that coming up just to reign parents.

    And giving examples. We have provided examples for most items. Use them. That’s why they’re there. You don’t have to come up with your own, but then come up with your own and then ask respondents for examples. So tell me another example because you don’t want just one. That’s a great example. Tell me another one. Those examples really give you more of a breadth of what.

    Dr. Sharp: Got you. Let’s see. I did want to talk about the standard of care. You mentioned way back in the beginning that administering an adaptive functioning measure is now standard of care in autism evaluations.

    Can you briefly justify that or explain why that’s important?

    And then, are there other situations where we should be thinking about adaptive functioning that might not be obvious? Are there situations where it’s a standard of care if you want to use that term to administer an adaptive functioning measure?

    Dr. Celine: Sure. I think across any neurodevelopmental disorder, it should be standard of care whether you’re talking about autism language disorders, learning disabilities, ADHD, you name it. So starting with autism, but certainly in these other disabilities as well, the majority of individuals right now do not have cognitive impairment. They’re only 33% of autistic individuals based on CBC epidemiological studies will have a cognitive impairment, which means the other 77% won’t. Did I get that math wrong? 67%.

    Dr. Sharp: There you go.

    Dr. Celine: Who said there’ll be math and vocabulary?

    Dr. Sharp: You brought that on yourself. That was you.

    Dr. Celine: I’m going to give a Wechsler test. They’re going to have highish to superior scores. We’re going to give language assessments like a self. They’re going to have average high, average superior scores. We’re going to give, academic and achievement testing and they’re going to excel.

    And so now what do I have to say? I did my diagnostic tests. I did an ADOS and I did my diagnostic history. And I say, yes, she has autism. Now, what recommendations am I making based on what information? That’s where the adaptive comes in. Where is their disability shown here? I can write up the ADOS and talk about the social disabilities, social communication impairments, but I have no scores behind me to back that up because the ADOS, even though there are algorithm scores, they’re not standard scores.

    So I still need something that’s going to inform insurance companies and educational systems why this person is eligible for services. And so, there’s your adaptive behavior, right? Throw in an executive functioning measure and for your older individuals, anxiety, and depression because that will likely be co-occurring. So that’s why I would say advocate for it because the adaptive scores will show you the deficits and you’ll have that ammunition, for lack of a better word, to fight for the services. 

    Dr. Sharp: That’s such a great point. I’m glad that you made that very clear. I haven’t really thought of it in that way before, but we do need some quantitative data sometimes.

    Well, I’ve asked you a lot of questions. We went from subject to subject and I think covered a lot. I know there’s a lot more that we could dig into, but before we start to wrap up, are there any resources, guides, anything for folks who want to learn more about adaptive functioning just as a construct and how to assess it appropriately?

    Dr. Celine: Oh, so not to plug my own book, but I have an Essentials of Autism Spectrum Disorders Evaluation and Assessment, and the essential series by Wiley. So most psychologists know. They’re like cheat sheets, your go-to guides. And so, I and Cheryl Klaiman wrote one on adaptive behavior. So it’s Essentials of Adaptive Behavior Assessment of Neurodevelopmental Disorders. I don’t have it right in front of me. I think that’s the name of it. So that’s a good book.

    In autism, anything by Peter Gerhart. There’s a book by Dan Crimmins and Peter Gerhart going back in the day, that’s on adaptive skills. Those are good to read. And if you really want to get into history, anything by Edgar Dahl.

    Dr. Sharp: Sure. Yeah, I think there are some folks out there who would probably appreciate that kind of thing. Although I have to say, the history of psychology was probably one of my worst classes in grad school, but I think I’d have a better appreciation of it now if I could go back at the time.

    Dr. Celine: I absolutely have a better appreciation of it now. I know. I wish I could go back and take some of those courses now.

    Dr. Sharp: Sure. It’s funny to think about that. My gosh.

    So before we totally wrap up, you are learning some new skills in your own life these days. Tell us about these new skills or skills that you’re revisiting, maybe as a better way to put it.

    Dr. Celine: I am revisiting old skills or trying for lack of a better word. I grew up as a Figure skater, and that’s how I spend my time when I’m not working. My two daughters who are 13 and 14 have been skating ever since we moved to Atlanta. So since 2011. And I figured if I’m there, you know, if you think about Atlanta, there are no rinks anywhere close. So I have to drive to Duluth, which is like in Atlanta traffic, a good 45 minutes to an hour from where I live. And I figured if I’m driving my girls that far, I’m going to start skating again.

    I had taken a 25-year hiatus. And so now all three of us skate and we all compete and we’re all on Theater on Ice teams. It’s a great recreational thing to do with my girls. Even having that time. They’re teenagers. They never talk to me, but when they’re forced in a car and they’re on a highway for an hour, sometimes there’s nothing to do but talk. It’s helpful there.

    Dr. Sharp: Absolutely. Like I was saying before we started to record, that is so admirable to get into something like that and be willing to push your body a little bit because that gets tougher as we get older.

    Dr. Celine: Oh, thank you. The first 20 years that I did it, I never broke a bone. In the past 10 years, I’ve broken a shoulder, a foot, pulled a hip socket, tendonitis, you name it. I’ve gotten it from skating. Yeah.

    Dr. Sharp: Oh my gosh. Well, even with those things, I’m sure your score on the motor domain would be really high, and that counts for a lot.

    Well, this has been great. It’s fun to talk to you always. And I appreciate you sharing all of your expertise with us yet again.

    Dr. Celine: Likewise. Thank you, Jeremy. And thanks to everyone who is listening. I really appreciate it.

    Dr. Sharp: Okay, y’all. Thanks so much for listening as always. I really appreciate it. I hope that the holiday season is going well for you, whatever that might look like.

    And like I mentioned, if you are looking ahead to the new year and want to take some steps to level up your practice and hopefully be less overwhelmed, step back a little bit, manage your employees a little better, grow your practice, that sort of thing, you can check out The Testing Psychologist Advanced Practice Mastermind Group. There are two spots left the last time I looked. And it starts in mid-January. So you can get more info at thetestingpsychologist.com/advanced. I hope to talk to you soon.

    All right. Take care in the meantime.

    The information contained in this podcast and on The Testing Psychologist website is intended for informational and educational purposes only. Nothing in this podcast or on the website is intended to be a substitute for professional, psychological, psychiatric, or medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment.

    Please note that no doctor-patient relationship is formed here, and similarly, no supervisory or consultative relationship is formed between the host or guests of this podcast and listeners of this podcast. If you need the qualified advice of any mental health practitioner or medical provider, please seek one in your area. Similarly, if you need supervision on clinical matters, please find a supervisor with expertise that fits your needs.

    Click here to listen instead!

  • 254. Adaptive Functioning w/ Dr. Celine Saulnier

    254. Adaptive Functioning w/ Dr. Celine Saulnier

    Would you rather read the transcript? Click here.

    I’m so happy to welcome Dr. Celine Saulnier back to the podcast to talk with us about adaptive functioning. Adaptive functioning is a crucial component of most assessments, yet it can also fade into the background if we’re not being deliberate in synthesizing all of our data. We cover a lot of ground in this interview, from the history of adaptive functioning to current standards of care for assessing adaptive functioning. Here are a few other topics that we cover:

    • Why high adaptive scores can be alarming
    • When to conduct an interview vs. administer the questionnaire version
    • How to reconcile discrepancies between IQ and adaptive functioning

    Cool Things Mentioned

    Featured Resource

    I am honored to partner with PAR for 2021 to bring you featured items from their catalog! Listen to each episode for specific product recommendations and links. Learn more at www.parinc.com.

    The Testing Psychologist podcast is approved for CEU’s!

    I’ve partnered with At Health to offer CE credits for podcast episodes! Visit this link to access current and past episodes available for CE credit. You can use code “TTP10” for a discount on ALL the course credits you purchase from At Health!

    About Dr. Celine Saulnier

    Celine Saulnier is a licensed clinical psychologist that specializes in diagnostic evaluations of autism spectrum and related disorders across the lifespan. She spent the first 20 years of her career in academia conducting research on early detection of autism and adaptive behavior profiles at the Yale Child Study Center and Emory University School of Medicine. In 2018, she opened her own company, Neurodevelopmental Assessment & Consulting Services in Decatur, GA where she has a private practice and continues to consult on research projects. She has published numerous papers, written two books, and is an author on the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Third Edition.

    Get in Touch

    email: celine@nacsatl.com
    website: www.nacsatl.com
    FB and Instagram: Celine Saulnier
    Linked In: Celine Saulnier or Neurodevelopmental Assessment & Consulting Services

    About Dr. Jeremy Sharp

    I’m a licensed psychologist and Clinical Director at the Colorado Center for Assessment & Counseling, a private practice that I founded in 2009 and have grown to over 20 clinicians. I earned my undergraduate degree in Experimental Psychology from the University of South Carolina before getting my Master’s and PhD in Counseling Psychology from Colorado State University. These days, I specialize in psychological and neuropsychological evaluation with kids and adolescents.

    As the host of the Testing Psychologist Podcast, I provide private practice consulting for psychologists and other mental health professionals who want to start or grow psychological testing services in their practices. I live in Fort Collins, Colorado with my wife (also a therapist) and two young kids.

    Ready to grow your testing services? Click below to schedule a complimentary 30-minute pre-consulting call!

    [x_button shape=”square” size=”large” float=”none” href=”https://app.acuityscheduling.com/schedule.php?owner=13476033&appointmentType=2843005″ target=”blank” info=”none” info_place=”top” info_trigger=”hover”]Schedule Your Call[/x_button]

  • 253 Transcript

    Dr. Sharp: Hello, everyone. Welcome to The Testing Psychologist podcast, the podcast where we talk all about the business and practice of psychological and neuropsychological assessment. I’m your host, Dr. Jeremy Sharp, licensed psychologist, group practice owner, and private practice coach.

    This episode is brought to you by PAR. PAR has recently released the Feifer Assessment of Childhood Trauma or the FACT, the first and only comprehensive instrument measuring how stress and trauma can impact children in a school-based setting. You can learn more or purchase the FACT teacher form by visiting parinc.com\fact_teacher.

    All right, y’all. Hey, welcome back to Holiday Hopes number four. If you have not tuned in to the previous Holiday Hopes episodes, Holiday Hopes is a seven-part series on business practices to help you [00:01:00] make some changes in the new year and get your practice in a hopefully better place. So these are seven short episodes where I’m tackling one business topic really just as a means to send you in the right direction, just gently push you in the right direction to make some of those changes you may have been thinking about over the course of the year or multiple years. And the new year is always a good time to make some changes.

    Before we jump to the episode, which is going to cover rates, so raising rates and negotiating rates with insurance companies, I want to invite any of you advanced practice owners to reach out. The next cohort of the advanced practice mastermind is starting in late January. It looks like as of now, there are three spots filled. So we’ve got three spots left.

    [00:02:00] The advanced practice group, as time has gone on, has really focused in on group practice owners who are managing employment concerns, growth, streamlining, finances, all those sorts of issues that come from running a practice with multiple employees. So stepping back, stop trading time for money, that sort of thing. If you are in that group and you would like some group coaching and accountability to help move your practice forward, I would love to help you out. You can go to thetestingpsychologist.com/advanced and book a pre-group call to see if it’s a good fit.

    All right. Let’s talk about rates.

    All right. So again, Holiday Hopes episodes are short and sweet. I’m not going to belabor any points here. This is really just meant as a time to listen and consider some changes to make in your practice and hopefully use this as one more little step in the right direction or reminder for yourself.

    So, I’m talking about rates today. It’s pretty straightforward. I’m really just bringing it to your conscious awareness that we theoretically should be raising our rates at least every other year. I think we should probably be raising our rates every year. Now, if you take insurance, that can be a more difficult process, of course, because you can’t just [00:04:00] unilaterally decide to raise your rates. And that is totally fine. So we’re going to talk about raising rates in private pay practices and negotiating raises with insurance companies.

    First of all, just making that decision to raise your rates can be difficult, right? However, I think of it in just pure economic terms. If you are a business in the United States, the cost of living is going up, right? Inflation, I guess, is what it’s called. That’s what I hear on the news and in the blogs. So inflation. So just raising your rates to account for inflation is important. What’s the standard rate of inflation? About 2.5%. So, just to keep up with [00:05:00] cost of living and things like that, especially lately, raising your rates is important just to keep pace with the market.

    Now, I’m not an economist. This might be a terrible practice from an economic perspective, the macro level, but raising your rates to keep pace with the cost of living is at its basic level, important. So that’s one place to start. But also if you have employees and especially if you’re private pay, this is not just about you, it’s about being able to offer higher rates to your employees and even your assistants. It really cuts across all levels of your practice. So, seriously consider raising your rates. It’s not just about you.

    What I have noticed as well is that test publishers are raising their own rates. What [00:06:00] started out a few years ago when we were doing online rating forms as $1 or $2 per form and per score report now is creeping upward to $3 and $4. So, prices increase.

    So there are plenty of reasons to raise your rates. Couple that with the fact that most new graduates coming out these days are setting their rates higher and higher. And at least in our area, we have found that practitioners continue to raise their rate. So you also have to consider where you fall in the market and make sure that you don’t fall too far below the median or mean as far as rates and out-of-pocket costs. So all good reasons to think about raising your rates.

    So how do you do that in private pay?

    Let’s take a quick break to hear from our featured partner.

    [00:07:00] Kids are experiencing trauma like never before. But how can you figure out whether they’ve been affected and how it impacts their behavior and performance at school?

    The Feifer Assessment of Childhood Trauma or the FACT is the first and only comprehensive instrument measuring how stress and trauma can impact children in a school-based setting. The FACT teacher form solicits the teacher’s perspective on the performance and behavior of children ages 4 to 18 years. It takes just 15 seconds to administer. And the available e-manual gives you detailed administration and scoring instructions. You can learn more or purchase the FACT teacher form by visiting parinc.com\fact_teacher.

    All right, let’s get back to the podcast.

    Well, doing it in a private pay practice is much easier than insurance. And doing it at the beginning of the year also makes sense. It’s a natural break. [00:08:00] It’s a time when people are thinking about resetting and doing things differently.

    So what you can do is generate a letter. For those of you who have existing clients, maybe some of you are seeing current therapy clients or ongoing appointments, you can create a letter that just says, “Hello, I’ve enjoyed our work together. Just sending a notice to all of my current clients that I will be raising my rates by X percent or X dollar amount starting whatever date, January 1st, February 1st, whatever it might be.” And that’s it. You send a letter and just let them know.

    Usually, we’re not talking about a huge increase. If you’re raising your rates every year, I think I would do at least a 2% increase, but 5% is pretty standard across our industry. So it’s not going to make a huge difference [00:09:00] for most people, but it’s important to communicate that.

    For those of you who are booked out for a number of months, this can be a little more challenging. What you want to do though is just have integrity with whatever you have communicated with the client so far. So if your client signed on for an evaluation, assuming that they were going to pay whatever amount, I don’t think it’s cool to change that. Some of you may disagree. That’s totally okay.

    I think if you were booked six months out, you could certainly send a letter to those folks or an email to those folks and say, just a heads up that has of whatever date I will be raising my rates. I know that you pursued this evaluation under the understanding of a different rate. [00:10:00] And I understand if you would like to cancel your appointment, whatever it might be. Chances are, so if you’re a private pay practice and you increase by 5%, it’s not going to be a deal-breaker for most folks, but I think it is important to have integrity in that process.

    If you’d rather not do that, then you can just pick a date a little further out and say, maybe you raise your rates for any appointments booked after June 1st, let’s say, or maybe you wait till January 1st of the following year, 2023.

    Now, as far as raising rates with insurance companies, this is a little more challenging. I did a large portion of a podcast dedicated to raising your rates with insurance companies. So I’m not going to get back in the weeds with that, but it is doable. I would encourage you to work that into your administrative workflow, [00:11:00] either for a true administrative assistant or billing specialist or to put it on your own plate to do this once a year, where you update your templated letters which I provide in the other podcast episode, there’s a template letter to request a raise from insurance panels. And I just make this a matter, of course, once a year to send in this letter and ask for a raise.

    Now, you may have to be a little more compelling with your rationale and do a little more research to justify this rate increase. So just know that. They’re not going to just give it to you. You may get turned down. You will likely get turned down by most insurance panels, but my experience has been that we will get a raise from insurance from at least one panel every 2 to 3 years. So it [00:12:00] can work. Don’t lose hope. But this is a good time to sit down and update those letters or generate those letters and send them to your provider representatives for each of the panels that you are paneled with.

    Now, I’ve also had good luck. We take a lot of Medicaid in our practice, and some people say that Medicaid is a little bit of a monolith that’s hard to break through and have any influence on, but we have also had a little bit of success, maybe not getting raises for Medicaid, but negotiating for more hours because of the types of evaluations we do, or finding other concessions, getting certain CPT codes added to the fee schedule that just weren’t on there as a matter of practice. So you may be able to get concessions in other ways if they’re not able to do a rate increase. So [00:13:00] take away from that, it is doable, and don’t be discouraged if you get turned down the first time or two that you asked. You got to just keep at it.

    So again, think about raising your rates. I think you can raise the more depending on the amount of time since the last raise. If you’re doing it yearly, I think 5% is very reasonable. If you haven’t done it for gosh, 5 years, 8 years, 10 years, then take a really good look at the market rates around you and make sure you are competitive with those.

    Like I said at the beginning, if you are a group practice owner with employees, you’re doing testing in your practice, and you’re looking for some support and accountability as you level up your practice, whatever that might look like, you can check out The Testing Psychologist Advanced Practice Mastermind Group. You can go [00:14:00] to thetestingpsychologist.com/advanced. The next cohort is starting in late January. I think there are three spots left and I’d love to talk with you. So set up a pre-group call. We’ll chat, see if it’s a good fit, and go from there.

    All right. Y’all take care. We are marching toward the holidays. I hope this has given you some things to think about as we get closer. All right. Until next time.

    The information contained in this podcast and on The Testing Psychologist website is intended for informational and educational purposes only. Nothing in this podcast or on the website is intended to be a substitute for [00:15:00] professional, psychological, psychiatric, or medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment.

    Please note that no doctor-patient relationship is formed here. And similarly, no supervisory or consultative relationship is formed between the host or guests of this podcast and listeners of this podcast. If you need the qualified advice of any mental health practitioner or medical provider, please seek one in your area. Similarly, if you need supervision on clinical matters, please find a supervisor with expertise that fits your needs.

    Click here to listen instead!