Occupational therapy workplace assessment report template (France)

An occupational therapy workplace assessment (in France often called an étude de poste) is an on-site analysis of what a disabled worker has to do, the environment in which they do it and their abilities, leading to concrete, ranked and costed adjustments that let them take up or keep that job.

For a standard OT report, see our occupational therapy report template; for housing, our guide to home adaptation recommendations.

The French framework: what the texts say

The occupational physician proposes, the employer responds

Article L4624-3 of the Labour Code (our translation): the occupational physician may propose, in writing and after discussion with the employee and the employer, individual measures to adjust, adapt or transform the workstation, or to adjust working time, justified in particular by the worker's age or physical and mental health.

Article L4624-6 (our translation): the employer must take into consideration the opinion, indications or proposals of the occupational physician; if it refuses, it must inform the worker and the physician in writing of the reasons why they cannot be followed.

Your report therefore carries most weight once the occupational physician takes up your recommendations: we recommend wording them so they can be reused as they stand.

The duty to take appropriate measures

Article L5213-6 requires the employer, to guarantee equal treatment of disabled workers, to take the appropriate measures, according to needs in a concrete situation, so that they can access or keep a job matching their qualifications, perform it, progress in it, or receive suitable training. The measures apply provided their cost is not disproportionate, taking into account available public aid, and refusing them may constitute discrimination.

RQTH, ergonomic study and Agefiph funding

• RQTH (recognition as a disabled worker): a decision of the CDAPH (MDPH). Service-public.fr states that declaring it to the employer is not mandatory. For the application itself, see our MDPH guide.
• Agefiph ergonomic study (étude ergonomique): according to Agefiph, it is free, reserved for complex situations, and delivers concrete, realistic and costed solutions. A physician must certify that the disability affects fitness for the job. Referring bodies are listed in the FAQ. The page does not say which professional carries out the study: ask the referring body.
• Workplace adaptation grant: according to Agefiph, the amount depends on the study and leaves to the employer the equipment needed to hold the job (for an ergonomic chair, it only covers the difference from an ordinary chair). The January 2026 fact sheet lists among the documents proof of eligible status or a pending application, a detailed opinion from the occupational physician (situation, difficulties, recommendations) and dated, itemised quotes.

Who does what

• Occupational therapist: observes on site, has the worker try equipment, recommends, follows up. Does not rule on fitness for work.
• Occupational physician: proposes adjustments in writing, writes the detailed opinion Agefiph asks for.
• Employer: considers the proposals, gives reasons for any refusal, applies for funding and purchases.
• Worker: decides whether to disclose their RQTH, tries solutions. We recommend agreeing with them on the report's content.
• Cap emploi: can request an ergonomic study, supports job retention.
• Agefiph: funds the ergonomic study and contributes to adjustments in the private sector. For public employers, the FIPHFP plays this role.

The process in five steps

• 1. Clarify the request. Who is asking, who pays, who will read the report. Get the job description and the physician's written restrictions before the visit.
• 2. Interview. Difficult tasks, strategies already found, what the worker agrees to see in writing.
• 3. Observe on site. When the critical tasks take place. Measure heights, distances, weights, frequencies. Photos only with the worker's and employer's consent.
• 4. Analyse person, activity, environment. Describe the gap between what the task demands and what the person can do in this environment.
• 5. Recommend, trial, report back, follow up. Verbal feedback, then a written report.

Report template to copy

1. Identification

• Title: Occupational therapy assessment of the work situation
• Occupational therapist: name, RPPS number, contact details
• Visit date(s) and observation time
• Context: Agefiph ergonomic study / employer request / occupational health service / other
• Requester, referrer, report recipients
• Worker: name, job, length of service, working hours, status (eligible: yes / pending / not disclosed)

2. Reason for referral

What triggered the request (return to work, hiring, difficulties) and the question asked.

3. The worker's situation

• Functional limitations relevant to the job
• Occupational physician's restrictions, quoted as written, with date
• Fatigue, pain, treatment: only if they affect work
• No diagnosis unless the worker agrees in writing and it is clearly needed

4. Job description

• Company, department, hours, team or solo work
• Duties and tasks, with frequency and duration
• Tools, software, furniture, travel, loads carried
• Rare but mandatory tasks (stocktaking, on-call, off-site meetings)

5. Method

Interviews, tasks observed and duration, measurements, documents reviewed, equipment trials.

6. On-site observation

Task by task: what happens, the difficulty seen, the worker's current strategy.

7. Analysis

• Person: preserved abilities, limitations, skills
• Activity: physical, cognitive and time demands
• Environment: space, equipment, organisation, team

8. Ranked recommendations

Priority 1 (essential to keep the job), priority 2 (useful), priority 3 (comfort). For each one:

• Disabling situation addressed
• Proposed solution and type (organisation, assistive device, building work, training, human support)
• Disability compensation or general employer obligation
• Trial carried out and outcome
• Cost: see attached quote
• Person responsible and deadline

9. Possible funding

Agefiph (private sector) or FIPHFP (public sector), employer share, other funders. List of documents to gather.

10. Follow-up

Follow-up visit date, observable success criteria, contact person.

Signature, date, and distribution note ("report sent to the worker, the occupational physician and the employer with the worker's consent").

More templates in our clinical document templates.

A fully completed fictional example

Identification and reason

Mrs L., 52, full-time administrative assistant in a 40-employee transport company, 12 years of service. Assessment requested by the employer after the return-to-work visit. Eligibility: RQTH application pending. Reason: return to work after sick leave for a right shoulder injury that required surgery; difficulties reported with data entry and filing.

The worker's situation

Occupational physician's restrictions: no raising the right arm above shoulder height, loads limited to 5 kg, alternate postures. Mrs L. is right-handed. No limitation on the left arm. Right shoulder pain after long mouse use. Very good command of the company's software.

Job and observation (one morning)

• Order entry (most of the day): mouse placed far to the right, shoulder forward and away from the body; screen sitting directly on the desk, too low; stops because of pain after about three quarters of an hour.
• Phone: handset wedged between ear and shoulder to keep hands free.
• Filing: files from the last two years on the top shelf; Mrs L. climbs a step stool and raises her right arm.
• Supplies: boxes of paper delivered on the floor at reception, which she moves alone. Not compatible with the 5 kg restriction.

Analysis

The difficulties come not from data entry itself but from the set-up (distant mouse, low screen) and the organisation (high storage, handling deliveries). Mrs L.'s abilities allow her to hold the job if arm raising and load carrying are removed.

Recommendations

• Priority 1, organisation: store recent files between hip and shoulder height; older archives up high, handled by a colleague. No cost. Office manager, within a week.
• Priority 1, organisation: supplies delivered straight to the storeroom and unpacked by the storekeeper. No cost.
• Priority 1, assistive devices (compensation): vertical or central mouse and compact keyboard without numeric pad, trialled for two weeks; wireless headset. Cost per attached quotes.
• Priority 2, basic workstation equipment: monitor arm and adjustable chair. Here we read them as normal office equipment, paid by the employer, and do not submit them to Agefiph. This is a reading: another assessor might claim the extra cost of an adapted chair.
• Priority 2, organisation: alternate data entry with other tasks about every 45 minutes.
• Priority 3, training: workstation set-up and keyboard shortcuts, one session with the occupational therapist.

Funding and follow-up

Workplace adaptation grant request for the mouse, keyboard and headset: physician's detailed opinion, quotes, proof of pending RQTH application. Follow-up visit one month after installation. Success criteria: morning data entry with no stop for pain, no load above 5 kg, no storage above shoulder height.

Ranking recommendations: four rules

• Reorganise before buying. Removing or moving a task often costs less and works at once.
• Separate compensation from employer obligations. Agefiph's fact sheet excludes investments that by nature are required to hold the job. Mixing the two weakens the application.
• Trial first. Note the trial and its outcome.
• Link every recommendation to an observation. That link is exactly what Agefiph asks you to set out.

Common mistakes

• Describing the job from the job description without observing it.
• Writing "the employer must": you recommend, the physician proposes, the employer decides.
• Presenting a standard office chair as disability compensation.

Checklist before sending

• Recipients defined and the worker's agreement on content
• Physician's restrictions quoted with their date
• No unnecessary diagnosis
• Each task described with its frequency
• Each recommendation linked to an observed situation
• Priorities 1, 2, 3 shown
• Compensation and standard equipment kept apart
• Trials noted, quotes attached
• Funder and documents listed
• Follow-up date and success criteria

Belgium and Switzerland

Belgium (Wallonia). AVIQ contributes to the cost of adapting an employee's workstation. According to its page, the disability must be recognised by AVIQ, the adjustment must not be usual in the sector, it must be essential, and the application must be submitted before the work is carried out. The form is signed by both employer and worker. In Brussels and Flanders, we recommend checking the regional rules.

Switzerland. The AHV/IV leaflet 4.09 (as of 1 January 2024) states that rehabilitation takes priority over a pension; to keep a job, support first means adapting the workstation. The application goes as early as possible to the IV office of the canton of residence.

Why Delta suits this kind of report

After the visit, you dictate your observations task by task; Delta drafts the report in your vocabulary and the structure of your existing reports, and keeps the follow-up history for the review visit. The person's name and identifying details are pseudonymised before the AI, data stays in Europe, in France, on infrastructure certified for health data, and no audio file is kept. Delta does not produce quotes or the Agefiph application. See also our overview of software for occupational therapists.

Sources

• French Labour Code, article L4624-3 (code.travail.gouv.fr, accessed 6 Nov 2026) and L4624-6
• French Labour Code, article L5213-6 (code.travail.gouv.fr, updated 20 Dec 2023)
• Agefiph, ergonomic study and workplace adaptation grant fact sheet, January 2026
• Service-public.fr, RQTH (checked 24 Mar 2026)
• AVIQ, workstation adaptation costs and AHV/IV leaflet 4.09 (2024)