AAC Device Trial Log
An AAC Device Trial Log template for documenting evaluation context, device and access trials, performance, and the final recommendation. Use it to compare options clearly and support a defensible acquisition decision.
Trusted by frontline teams 15 years of frontline software AI customization in seconds
Built for: Healthcare · Special Education · Rehabilitation
Overview
The AAC Device Trial Log template is designed to document an augmentative and alternative communication evaluation in a way that supports clear comparison and a final device recommendation. It gives you a structured place to record the evaluation context, the patient’s baseline communication profile, each device and access trial, and the outcome of the assessment.
Use this template when you are testing one or more AAC systems, comparing access methods such as direct touch, switch scanning, or alternative input, or preparing documentation for a funding or acquisition decision. It is especially useful when the patient’s needs are changing, when multiple clinicians are contributing observations, or when you need a record that explains why one system fit better than another.
Do not use it as a generic intake form or as a substitute for a full clinical note. It is not meant to collect unnecessary personal data, and it should not be filled with every possible device feature if those features were never trialed. Keep the record focused on what was actually observed, what the patient could do with support, and what additional supports are still needed. The strongest logs are specific enough to show feature match and performance, but concise enough that another clinician can review the decision without guessing.
Standards & compliance context
- Use consent_for_documentation to confirm that the evaluation record may include patient information and trial observations.
- Limit PII to what is necessary for the AAC evaluation and avoid collecting unrelated identifiers.
- If the log is shared across a care team or school team, follow your organization’s privacy and record-retention rules for clinical documentation.
- When documenting access limitations or support needs, use neutral language that supports reasonable accommodation planning without adding unnecessary sensitive detail.
General regulatory context for orientation only — verify current requirements with counsel or the relevant agency before relying on this template for compliance.
What's inside this template
Evaluation Context
This section matters because it sets the clinical and documentation context for every trial that follows.
- Evaluation Date
-
Patient Initials
Use initials instead of full name when possible to minimize PII.
- Patient Age Group
- Evaluation Setting
-
Referral / Communication Need
Briefly describe the communication need being addressed. Avoid unnecessary clinical detail.
-
Consent to Document Evaluation Details
Confirm that appropriate consent or authorization has been obtained for documenting evaluation details, including any PII collected.
Baseline Communication Profile
This section matters because it shows how the patient communicates now and what barriers the AAC system needs to address.
- Current Communication Methods
- Primary Communication Goals
- Motor / Access Limitations
-
Baseline Notes
Summarize relevant baseline communication strengths, barriers, and supports.
Device and Access Trials
This section matters because it captures the actual comparison data that supports feature matching and performance review.
-
Trial Summary
Add one entry for each device or access method trialed.
- Device / System Trialed
- Access Method
- Feature Match
- Performance Rating
-
Trial Observations
Document accuracy, speed, prompting level, fatigue, and any barriers observed during the trial.
Outcome and Recommendation
This section matters because it turns the trial evidence into a clear system choice, access plan, and next-step summary.
- Preferred AAC System
- Recommended Access Method
-
Recommendation Rationale
Explain how the recommended system and access method match the patient’s needs, performance, and feature requirements.
- Additional Supports Needed
-
Clinician Name
Enter the clinician completing the evaluation record.
How to use this template
- 1. Enter the evaluation date, patient initials, age group, setting, referral reason, and consent for documentation before you begin any trial documentation.
- 2. Summarize the patient’s current communication methods, primary goals, motor or access limitations, and baseline notes so the trial results can be interpreted in context.
- 3. Record each device trial with a short summary, the device name, the access method used, the feature match, the performance rating, and the key observations from that session.
- 4. Compare the trial entries and identify the preferred system and recommended access method based on the patient’s observed performance and communication goals.
- 5. Write the recommendation rationale and list any additional supports needed, such as training, mounting, partner support, or follow-up trials, before the log is submitted.
Best practices
- Use patient initials and the minimum necessary identifying information unless your workflow requires a fuller record.
- Document the exact access method tested for each trial, because device success often depends more on access than on the device itself.
- Keep the performance rating tied to observable behavior, such as initiation, accuracy, fatigue, and need for prompting, rather than a vague impression.
- Record feature match in plain language so reviewers can see why a symbol set, output style, or input method was selected.
- Use progressive disclosure in your workflow by adding only the trial fields that apply to the device being tested.
- Note environmental factors such as noise, positioning, or fatigue when they affected performance during the trial.
- Capture what support was needed during the trial, because assistance level is often part of the final recommendation.
What this template typically catches
Issues teams running this template most often surface in practice:
Common use cases
Frequently asked questions
What is this AAC Device Trial Log template used for?
This template is used to document an AAC evaluation from the first context notes through the final device recommendation. It captures the patient’s communication profile, trialed devices, access methods, feature match, and observed performance in one place. That makes it easier to compare options and explain why a system was selected.
Who should complete the trial log?
It is typically completed by an SLP or other clinician leading the AAC evaluation, often with input from OT, PT, caregivers, and the patient when possible. The submitter should be someone who can observe trials, interpret access needs, and write a recommendation that matches the evaluation findings. If multiple people contribute, the log should still identify one accountable submitter.
How often should AAC device trials be logged?
Use the log each time a device, access method, or major feature set is trialed during an evaluation period. For longer evaluations, you can add one entry per session or per device comparison so the record stays specific. Avoid waiting until the end, because details about performance and setup are easy to lose.
What should be included in the feature match section?
Record which features were tested and why they matter for the patient’s communication goals, such as symbol layout, voice output, keyguard use, switch access, or word prediction. The point is to show how the device aligns with the person’s motor, sensory, and language needs. Keep it tied to observable trial results rather than general preferences.
Does this template support privacy and consent requirements?
Yes, the evaluation context includes a consent_for_documentation field so you can note whether documentation was authorized. Use patient initials instead of full identifiers when appropriate, and only collect the minimum necessary PII needed for the evaluation record. If the log will be shared, make sure the distribution matches your organization’s privacy rules.
What are the most common mistakes when using an AAC trial log?
Common mistakes include listing only the preferred device without documenting alternatives, using vague performance notes, and skipping access-method details. Another issue is recording too many irrelevant fields instead of focusing on what was actually trialed and observed. The log works best when each trial entry is specific and comparable.
Can this template be customized for pediatric, adult, or school-based evaluations?
Yes, the structure is flexible enough for pediatric, adult, outpatient, inpatient, or school-based AAC evaluations. You can adjust the setting, referral reason, and baseline communication fields to fit the population and workflow. If your team uses different scoring language, you can also customize the performance_rating scale.
How does this compare with ad hoc notes in a chart or spreadsheet?
Ad hoc notes often make it hard to compare devices, trace the reasoning behind a recommendation, or find the final access method later. This template standardizes the same core fields across trials, which improves consistency and makes review easier for the care team. It also helps reduce missing details that can weaken a device acquisition request.
Related templates
Go deeper on the topic
-
A standard operating procedure (SOP) is a documented, step-by-step procedure for a repeatable task — the written version of "how we do this here." Good SOPs...
-
Workforce management (WFM) is the operational discipline of getting the right employees, with the right skills, in the right place, at the right time — and...
-
A daily huddle is a brief (10–15 minute) standing meeting held at the start of a shift or workday to align the team on priorities, surface issues, and...
-
A deskless worker is any employee whose job happens without a desk, a company laptop, or a fixed workstation. They're roughly 80% of the global workforce —...
-
Compare 9 top shift scheduling platforms for 2026—features, pricing, and workforce fit for frontline, retail, healthcare, and enterprise teams.
-
Boost team collaboration with modern tools that improve visibility, accountability, and communication for stronger project outcomes.
-
Discover 4 proven keys to successful project management and team collaboration — from transparent goal-setting to real-time communication and workflow...
-
Compare the best employee apps of 2026—MangoApps, Blink, WorkJam, Flip, and more—to find the right fit for your frontline workforce.
Ready to use this template?
Get started with MangoApps and use AAC Device Trial Log with your team — pricing built for small business.
