Cover_v4_ cover_final.

qxd 8/16/11 8:50 AM Page 1

MANUAL

Sensory Processing Measure ( SPM )

Home Form
by L. Diane Parham, Ph.D., OTR/L, FAOTA,
and Cheryl Ecker, M.A., OTR/L

Sensory Processing Measure

Main Classroom and

MANUAL

School Environments Forms

by Heather Miller Kuhaneck, M.S., OTR/L, FAOTA,
Diana A. Henry, M.S., OTR/L, FAOTA, and
Tara J. Glennon, Ed.D., OTR/L, FAOTA

Additional copies of this manual (W- 466D) may be purchased from WPS.
Please contact us at 800-648-8857 or wpspublish.com.

W- 466D
 1
INTRODUCTION
The Sensory Processing Measure (SPM) is an
integrated system of rating scales that enables assessment of
sensory processing issues, praxis, and social participation in
elementary school–aged children. The SPM consists of three
forms: the Home Form (WPS Product No. W-466A), the
Main Classroom Form (WPS Product No. W-466B), and the
School Environments Form (WPS Product No. W-466C).
Together, these measures provide a unique and comprehensive
perspective on a child’s sensory functioning in home, school,
and community environments.
The SPM is anchored in sensory integration theory
(Ayres, 1972, 1979, 2005). This theory proposes that the
processing and integration of sensory inputs is a critical
neurobehavioral process that strongly affects development.
The theory holds that a child with compromised sensory
processing may be unable to learn efficiently or function at
an expected level in daily activities. Difficulties at the level
of sensory processing often contribute to impairment
in higher level integrative functions, such as social
participation and praxis (the ability to plan and organize
movement).
Sensory integration theory delineates principles for
the assessment of sensory function, many of which are
embodied in the SPM. In particular, three key dimensions of
measurement are realized in the structure of the SPM itself:
• Assessment of sensory systems: the SPM scale
scores provide norm-referenced indexes of function
in the visual, auditory, tactile, proprioceptive, and
vestibular sensory systems, as well as the integrative
functions of praxis and social participation
• Assessment of sensory integration vulnerabilities:
the SPM item responses provide descriptive
clinical information on processing vulnerabilities
within each sensory system, including under- and
over-responsiveness, sensory-seeking behavior,
and perceptual problems
• Assessment across multiple environments: the
three forms of the SPM permit the user to
compare and contrast the child’s functioning in
home, school, and community environments
The SPM is a union of two prior test development
programs. The SPM Home Form is the latest version of the
3
Evaluation of Sensory Processing (ESP; Parham & Ecker,
2002), a caregiver report of children’s sensory functioning in
the home and community. The SPM Main Classroom and
School Environments Forms evolved from the School
Assessment of Sensory Integration (SASI; Miller Kuhaneck,
Henry, Glennon, & Mu, in press), a rating scale that
addresses sensory processing issues across multiple school
environments. The history of the ESP and SASI projects is
described in more detail in chapter 4 of this manual. The
SPM has united these earlier measures in a common
standardization effort, creating a cohesive set of test
materials with parallel items and scales.
Summary of Features
The SPM is designed to assess children in kindergarten
through sixth grade (ages 5 through 12). The test items cover
a wide range of behaviors and characteristics related to
sensory processing, social participation, and praxis. Each
item is rated in terms of the frequency of the behavior on a
4-point, Likert-type scale. The response options are Never,
Occasionally, Frequently, and Always.
The SPM Home Form consists of 75 items and is
completed by the child’s parent or home-based care provider.
The SPM Main Classroom Form consists of 62 items and is
completed by the child’s primary classroom teacher. Each of
these forms requires about 15 to 20 minutes to be filled out by
the respondent and an additional 5 to 10 minutes to be scored
by the examiner. Each of these forms is an AutoScore™ Form
that transfers the rater’s responses via carbon paper to a
scoring worksheet to facilitate calculation of scores.
The Home Form and Main Classroom Form both yield
eight norm-referenced standard scores: Social Participation
(SOC), Vision (VIS), Hearing (HEA), Touch (TOU), Body
Awareness (BOD), Balance and Motion (BAL), Planning
and Ideas (PLA), and Total Sensory Systems (TOT). The
Body Awareness, Balance and Motion, and Planning and
Ideas scales are lay terms for proprioception, vestibular
function, and praxis, respectively. The standard score for
each scale enables classification of the child’s functioning
into one of three interpretive ranges: Typical, Some Problems,
or Definite Dysfunction. In addition, an Environment
4 Administration, Scoring, and Interpretation Guide

Difference (DIF) score allows direct comparison of the Table 1

child’s sensory functioning between home and school SPM Forms and Scales
environments.
Number of items
The SPM School Environments Form is designed to
be completed by teachers and other school staff members Home Form scales
who work with and observe the child in the following six Social Participation (SOC) 10
settings: Art Class (ART), Music Class (MUS), Physical Vision (VIS) 11
Education Class (PHY), Recess/Playground (REC), Hearing (HEA) 8
Cafeteria (CAF), and School Bus (BUS). The School Touch (TOU) 11
Environments Form must always be used in conjunction Body Awareness (BOD) 10
with the Main Classroom Form in order to provide a Balance and Motion (BAL) 11
complete picture of the child’s functioning at school. Planning and Ideas (PLA) 9
The School Environments Form is provided on an Total Sensory Systems (TOT) 56
unlimited-use CD that allows the user to print the form as
needed. The form itself is divided into six separate Rating Main Classroom Form scales
Sheets, one for each of the school environments. Although it Social Participation (SOC) 10
is ideal to obtain raters for all six environments, the School Vision (VIS) 7
Environments Form can still be used if fewer than six raters Hearing (HEA) 7
are available. The user simply prints whatever Rating Sheets Touch (TOU) 8
are needed. Body Awareness (BOD) 7
Each Rating Sheet has 15 items, except for the School Balance and Motion (BAL) 9
Bus sheet, which has 10 items. Thus, each rater can complete Planning and Ideas (PLA) 10
his or her ratings in less than 5 minutes. Total Sensory Systems (TOT) 42
The School Environments Form yields a Total score
for each environment, which is interpreted by means of a School Environments Form scales
cutoff criterion. Children who score at or above the cutoff Art Class (ART) 15
are experiencing an unusually high number of sensory Music Class (MUS) 15
processing problems in that environment. Physical Education Class (PHY) 15
Table 1 summarizes the forms and scales of the SPM. Recess/Playground (REC) 15
The Home Form and Main Classroom Form were Cafeteria (CAF) 15
standardized on a demographically representative sample of School Bus (BUS) 10
1,051 typically developing children in Grades K through 6. Note. The Home and Main Classroom scales yield norm-referenced
For the Home Form scale scores, internal consistency (α) standard scores. The School Environments scales yield Total scores
estimates ranged from .77 to .95 (median = .85), and test- that are interpreted by means of a cutoff criterion. The TOT scales
include the VIS, HEA, TOU, BOD, and BAL items, plus several items
retest reliability estimates ranged from .94 to .98 (median = representing taste and smell processing.
.97). For the Main Classroom Form scale scores, internal
consistency estimates ranged from .75 to .95 (median = .86),
and test-retest reliability estimates ranged from .95 to .98
(median = .97). educational, clinical, and research settings. The SPM was
A subsample of 306 children from the standardization developed by occupational therapists, but the information it
sample was used to develop scores and establish cutoff provides will also be of value to other professionals,
criteria for the School Environments Form. The School including school psychologists, clinical psychologists,
Environments scores yielded internal consistency values social workers, counselors, physical therapists, speech and
ranging from .82 to .91 (median = .89). language pathologists, psychiatrists, pediatricians, and
A separate sample of 345 children receiving nurses. The SPM School Environments Form incorporates
occupational therapy intervention was used to verify that the the input of school staff members who normally do not
SPM scales can differentiate typical children from those contribute to assessments. In this way, it serves a team-
with clinical disorders. In addition, factor analysis and building function by educating these staff members about
correlational studies provided evidence for the validity of sensory processing disorders and by integrating their
the scale scores. For more detail on the standardization and observations to provide a more comprehensive picture of the
validation of the SPM, see chapters 4 and 5 of this manual. child’s functioning.
The SPM forms are easy to use and can be administered
Principles of Use and scored by staff members who do not have backgrounds
in occupational therapy or psychological testing. The SPM
The SPM is intended to support the identification and is intended to be interpreted by an occupational therapist
treatment of children with sensory processing difficulties. It with postprofessional training in sensory integration. It is
is therefore appropriate for use in a wide range of strongly recommended that other professionals support their
Chapter 1 Introduction
use of the SPM with formal training in sensory integration.
Before administering the SPM, potential users should read
this manual to become familiar with the theoretical rationale,
development, standardization, and psychometric properties
of the measure.
The SPM can be administered by itself as a screening
instrument, but the examiner should not use the results to
make diagnostic or treatment decisions without first
assembling the widest possible spectrum of information
about the child. Other sources of relevant data include, but
are not limited to, additional standardized rating scales,
performance measures of sensorimotor function (e.g., the
Sensory Integration and Praxis Tests [SIPT], Ayres, 1989),
curriculum-based measures, clinical observations, medical
records, occupational profiles, and interviews with parents,
teachers, school staff members, and (when appropriate) the
child being assessed.
5
Citing the SPM in Research Manuscripts
The SPM consists of four components that can be
cited in research manuscripts: the Manual, the Home Form,
the Main Classroom Form, and the School Environments
Form. The SPM Manual is a collaborative product of all five
SPM authors. The three SPM forms, on the other hand,
represent the prior separate work of two distinct author
groups. The SPM Home Form was developed by L. Diane
Parham and Cheryl Ecker. The SPM Main Classroom and
School Environments Forms were developed by Heather
Miller Kuhaneck, Diana A. Henry, and Tara J. Glennon.
The proper way to cite the SPM depends on which
components were used in the research study. Please see
Appendix A of this manual for detailed guidelines on how to
cite the SPM.