Sensorimotor assessment report template (psychomotor therapy)

A sensorimotor assessment report is the document in which a psychomotor therapist describes how a child takes in and processes information from their body and surroundings, and how they organise muscle tone, posture and action from it. In French-speaking countries it usually draws on the approach of André Bullinger, and it is written for the doctor, the parents and, in France, the coordination and referral platform (PCO) or the early intervention centre (CAMSP).

What the sensorimotor assessment is

The sensorimotor assessment was developed by Professor André Bullinger between 1985 and 1995, according to an article from the University of Lausanne about its certificate course. The principle is summed up there as engaging the child bodily by calling on the senses through objects, then observing how the child structures their actions and the environment they interact with. Bullinger describes the approach in Le développement sensori-moteur de l'enfant et ses avatars (érès, 2004); a review in Enfances & Psy notes that the large place given to parents and interviews is essential.

The core notion is the sensory flow, proposed by Bullinger and defined, in Louis Vallée's preface to Bernard Meurin's book on the approach (In Press), as a dynamic set of continuous, oriented signals that stimulate the sensitive surface of a mobile sensor. The clinician looks less at what the child cannot do than at how they handle these flows, how they organise around the body axis and how they recover when stimulation overwhelms them.

In France, the France Compétences RS7570 listing (certification for the André Bullinger sensorimotor assessment, held by the IFAB training institute, registered until April 2028) describes it as a clinical assessment tool built on Bullinger's work, observing how a person "mobilise ses compétences sensorielles, motrices, posturales et relationnelles" (sensory, motor, postural and relational skills). It states that for psychomotor therapists the assessment falls fully within their scope of practice, and it treats video capture and report writing as distinct competences, the report requiring "une interprétation claire et argumentée" (a clear, reasoned interpretation) of the person's sensorimotor functioning. In French-speaking Switzerland, the University of Lausanne and the CHUV have run a certificate course on this assessment (a 2024-2025 edition was announced in the 2023 article).

The RS7570 listing writes the name "Bilan Sensori-Moteur André Bullinger" with the ® symbol, and the certification involves IFAB training and assessment. If you are not certified, we recommend titling your document "sensorimotor observation".

Sensorimotor assessment, psychomotor assessment, Sensory Profile 2: the differences

• Standard psychomotor assessment: age-normed tests plus observation; it places the child against a norm for gross and fine motor skills, body schema, space, time and handwriting. Our psychomotor assessment report template (in French) covers its structure.
• Sensorimotor assessment (Bullinger approach): clinical observation of situations offered with objects, often filmed, with parents present; it describes the child's organisation, supports and ways of regulating, without a normed score.
• Sensory Profile 2 (Dunn): a questionnaire published in France by Pearson (ECPA adaptation, 2023). According to the Pearson France sheet, the Toddler form covers 7 to 35 months (parent, 54 items), the Child form 3 to 14 years 11 months (parent, 86 items) and the School form, also 3 to 14 years 11 months, is completed by the teacher (44 items). Results are read in four quadrants (Seeking, Avoiding, Sensitivity, Registration), scored online only, on Q-global.

In a report, name the questionnaire with its form and edition, give its results under their own heading, and set them against what you observed. A gap between the two is information in itself.

What the report should describe, domain by domain

"Hypotonia" alone tells the doctor nothing; "sitting on the floor, he props himself on both hands and slumps as soon as he lifts one to reach the object" shows them what you saw.

• Tone: background and action tone, changes with emotion, tonic bracing (clenched fists, raised shoulders) under strong stimulation.
• Posture and body axis: supports on the floor, sitting, standing; flexion, straightening, gathering towards the midline.
• Sensory flows: responses to tactile, vestibular, proprioceptive, visual and auditory flows; what the child seeks, avoids or seems not to notice; use of gaze (central or peripheral) and of the hand.
• Coordination: eye-hand, using both hands together, moving around.
• Spatial organisation: exploring near and far space, containers, stacking, shape fitting.
• Tonic and emotional regulation: what disorganises the child, how they calm down (rocking, mouthing, seeking pressure, leaning on the adult), how long it takes.
• Oral sphere (where relevant): mouthing objects, responses to touch around the face, food selectivity reported by parents. Describe and refer on if needed; feeding assessment may belong to another professional.

Sensorimotor assessment report template to copy

1. Header

• Child's name, date of birth, age at assessment.
• Therapist: name, practice address, registration number.
• Dates of sessions and of the feedback meeting.
• Referred by: doctor, PCO, CAMSP, other. Recipients of the report.

2. Reason for referral

Who is asking, why, with what question. Use the parents' words and those of the referral letter.

3. Relevant history

Pregnancy and birth if relevant, motor milestones, sleep, eating, childcare or school, current care, previous assessments. Only what sheds light on what follows.

4. Assessment setting

Sessions, length, parents present, video capture with their written consent, tools used. The child's state on the day.

5. Observations by domain

• Tone: …
• Posture and body axis: …
• Sensory flows (tactile, vestibular, proprioceptive, visual, auditory): …
• Coordination: …
• Spatial organisation: …
• Tonic and emotional regulation: …
• Oral sphere: …
• Relationship and communication during the assessment: …

6. Questionnaire (if used)

Name, form, edition, who completed it and when. Results reported as they are, then compared with observations.

7. Strengths

What the child already organises around: a support, a well-handled flow, a game that settles them, a supportive relationship.

8. Summary

Five to ten lines. The main features of sensorimotor functioning, how they connect, their effects on daily life. No medical diagnosis.

9. Recommendations

• Psychomotor therapy: frequency, length, goals.
• Adjustments at home.
• Adjustments at nursery or school.
• Further opinions or assessments to suggest to the doctor.
• Planned reassessment date.

10. Feedback and signature

Date of feedback to parents, what was discussed, their comments. Place, date, signature.

Filled-in fictional example

Fictional case, invented for illustration.

Header: Lina M., born 12/08/2022, 4 years 2 months at assessment. Assessment by Ms F., a self-employed psychomotor therapist under contract with the PCO, over two 60-minute sessions (6 and 13 October 2026), feedback on 27 October 2026. Referred by her paediatrician via the PCO. Recipients: PCO coordinating doctor, paediatrician, parents.

Reason for referral: the paediatrician raises a possible autism spectrum disorder and requests a psychomotor assessment. The parents describe a child "who covers her ears everywhere" and refuses clothes with collars.

History: walked at 17 months. Takes a long time to fall asleep. Eats only smooth textures according to her parents. In her second year of nursery school, the teacher reports withdrawal during group times. Speech therapy assessment pending.

Setting: two sessions with both parents present, video capture with their written consent. Sensory Profile 2, Child form, completed by the mother. Lina is tired at the first session and more available at the second.

Tone: rather low at rest. At noise from the next room, Lina stiffens, fists closed, shoulders raised.

Posture: sitting on the floor, she often leans against the wall or her mother. Standing, she goes on tiptoe when moving quickly.

Sensory flows: clear withdrawal from foam and modelling clay; smooth hard objects accepted. Seeks movement: spins, asks for the hammock. Gaze often peripheral. Stops her activity after a loud sound.

Coordination: grasps and releases precisely, but rarely uses both hands together; to open a box she wedges it against her stomach. Can throw a ball, avoids catching.

Spatial organisation: explores mostly near space; lines objects up along the edge of the mat; shape fitting successful.

Regulation: calms down by rocking or curling into a blanket held tight by her mother, within one to two minutes.

Oral sphere: still mouths hard objects; refuses the adult's hand near her face.

Questionnaire: Sensory Profile 2 results attached, consistent with the tactile avoidance and movement seeking observed.

Strengths: precise hands, enjoys movement, settles quickly with enveloping pressure, trusts her parents.

Summary: the assessment shows strong reactivity to tactile and auditory flows, which disorganises Lina's tone, and marked seeking of vestibular flows that she uses to regulate herself. Limited coordinated use of both hands and frequent leaning on the adult or the wall suggest a body axis that is still fragile. These observations describe sensorimotor particularities; on their own they do not allow a conclusion on the suspected autism, which is a matter for medical assessment.

Recommendations: psychomotor therapy, one 45-minute session a week, with goals of building axis and supports, gradually widening tactile tolerance and two-handed coordination. At home, warn Lina before predictable noise (vacuum cleaner) and keep the blanket as a calming tool. At school, offer a quiet corner and a place at the end of the line during group times. Suggest to the doctor that the pending speech therapy assessment include feeding. Reassessment in one year.

Feedback: on 27 October 2026, with the parents, using two video clips. The parents recognise the reactions to noise and ask for ideas about dressing, noted for the first sessions.

If you work within the French PCO early intervention package

According to the 2025 technical sheet on the early intervention package, the package funds self-employed occupational therapists, psychologists and psychomotor therapists, for children under 7, extended to ages 7 to 12 by a 2021 circular. It provides 120 euros for a simple assessment and 1,500 euros for a minimum of 35 sessions on average. Two points matter for writing: the amounts include writing the assessment and intervention reports, and the package can only be paid to professionals who have signed a collaboration contract with the platform. Proposals are validated by the coordinating doctor, so write for them. The structure expected in this pathway is covered in our PCO early intervention report template (in French), and family funding in our page on psychomotor therapy reimbursement in France (in French).

In Belgium and Switzerland this package does not exist: the template stays the same, only the recipient and funding change.

Writing useful recommendations

A recommendation should be usable on Monday morning. "Adapt the sensory environment" means nothing to a teacher; "place Lina at the end of the line and warn her before the bell" gives her something to do. Link each recommendation to an observation, separate home, school and therapy, and phrase further assessments as suggestions to the doctor.

Common mistakes

• Interpreting beyond the observation: "Lina is autistic" or "sensory processing disorder" does not belong here. Write what you saw and your reading of it, within your scope.
• Jargon for parents: "vestibular flow", "body axis", "tonic bracing" need a sentence of explanation.
• Mixing frameworks: citing Bullinger and then describing "modulation disorders" from another model blurs the reading. Say which tool supports which conclusion.
• Leaving out strengths: a list of difficulties helps neither the plan nor the family.
• Ignoring context: fatigue, a new place, a parent present or absent change everything. Note them.
• Vague recommendations: give frequency, goals and a reassessment date.

Checklist before sending

• The reason for referral is stated, with who asked.
• The setting is described: sessions, parents present, written consent for video, tools used.
• Each domain contains at least one concrete situation.
• Questionnaire results are kept apart from observations.
• Strengths appear before the summary.
• The summary contains no medical diagnosis.
• Each technical term is explained once.
• Recommendations are grouped (therapy, home, school, further opinions) with a reassessment date.
• Recipients are named and feedback to parents is dated.

Why Delta fits this report

Delta is the clinical assistant for psychomotor therapists that keeps the memory of every patient. After the assessment, you dictate your observations domain by domain or add your written notes, and Delta drafts the report in your vocabulary and structure, learned from your existing assessments. It does not review your videos, calculates no scores and makes no diagnosis: analysis and conclusions remain yours. The child's record then keeps the follow-up summary and goals, which makes the progress assessment easier. Data stays in Europe, in France, on infrastructure certified for health data, and the child's name is pseudonymised before the AI. For other formats, see our clinical document templates.

Sources

• France Compétences, RS7570, André Bullinger sensorimotor assessment certification (IFAB), registered 30/04/2026 (in French)
• French Ministry for Disabled People, early intervention package technical sheet, 2025 (in French)
• Pearson France, Profil Sensoriel 2, Dunn W., French adaptation, 2023 (in French)
• Enfances & Psy no. 28 (2004), review of A. Bullinger, Le développement sensori-moteur de l'enfant et ses avatars, érès (in French)
• University of Lausanne, Allez savoir! no. 83 (May 2023), on the sensorimotor assessment certificate (in French)