Our highly credentialed vocational rehabilitation and life care plan experts write about topics that are important and relevant to our areas of practice. If you have a vocational or life care planning topic you would like to learn more about, please contact us to request a blog post on that topic.
Rancho Los Amigos Scale – Stages of Recovery After Traumatic Brain Injury
A key element in the development of a Life Care Plan is the creation of a thorough medical record summary highlighting the details of an individual’s initial injury, treatment interventions, and symptomology. The Life Care Planner must have a broad understanding of medical diagnoses and their related symptoms. The spectrum of symptoms following a traumatic brain injury (TBI) can be wide and often highly complex depending on the severity of the brain injury.
Several clinical scales have been developed to assist providers in quickly assessing and categorizing TBI patients such as the Glascow Coma Scale, Post-Traumatic Amnesia Scale, Mayo Classification System of TBI Severity, and The Ranchos Los Amigos Scale. Identifying and comprehending these scales can enable the Life Care Planner to better predict the likelihood of specific future treatment modalities and guide conversations when collaborating with treating providers.
Developed in the 1970s at the Rancho Los Amigos National Rehabilitation Center in California, the Rancho Los Amigos Scale (also known as the Rancho Los Amigos Levels of Cognitive Functioning Scale) is a widely utilized clinical tool for identifying and describing the stages of cognitive and behavioral recovery following a traumatic brain injury (TBI). This scale helps clinicians assess a patient’s current level of function and track progress throughout the rehabilitation process. It was later revised to the Revised Rancho Los Amigos Scale (RLAS-R) and contains ten levels ranging from the most severely impaired (Level 1) to near or full independent functioning (Level 10).
Listed below are the ten levels of the scale and their corresponding descriptions:
Level I: No Response – Total Assistance. The person appears in a coma-like state. There is no observable response to any external stimuli (sound, touch, pain, light, etc.). They seem asleep or unresponsive.
Level II: Generalized Response – Total Assistance Responses begin but are inconsistent, non-purposeful, and generalized (e.g., the same delayed reflex or body movement to any stimulus, like pain or sound). Responses are often the same regardless of what stimulus is applied.
Level III: Localized Response – Total Assistance Responses become more specific and directly related to the stimulus (e.g., turning head toward sound, pulling away from pain, blinking at bright light, or inconsistently following a simple command like "squeeze my hand"). Still highly inconsistent and delayed.
Level IV: Confused/Agitated – Maximal Assistance The person is alert but extremely confused and agitated. They may be hyperactive, aggressive, resistant, or emotionally volatile with rapid mood swings. Short attention span, no recent memory, uncooperative, may try to pull out tubes/restraints or wander. Speech may be incoherent or inappropriate.
Level V: Confused, Inappropriate Non-Agitated – Maximal Assistance Agitation decreases, but confusion persists. The person can follow simple commands inconsistently and may perform familiar tasks with cues, but has poor judgment, memory problems, and distractibility. Behavior is often inappropriate to the situation.
Level VI: Confused, Appropriate – Moderate Assistance The person shows more goal-directed behavior and can follow simple routines with direction. Memory and problem-solving are still impaired. They may recognize familiar people/places but remain confused about details and need supervision for safety.
Level VII: Automatic, Appropriate – Minimal Assistance for Daily Living The person functions automatically in familiar environments and routines with minimal supervision. They can perform daily activities but may still have abstract thinking deficits, reduced insight, or difficulty in new/unfamiliar situations. Judgment and problem-solving remain limited.
Level VIII: Purposeful and Appropriate – Stand-by Assistance The person is alert, oriented, and can respond appropriately most of the time. They can learn new things with some effort and have good recall. May still have mild deficits in higher-level cognition (complex planning, abstract reasoning)) but can live independently with occasional stand-by support or cueing.
Level IX: Purposeful and Appropriate – Stand-by Assistanceon Request Independent in most daily activities. Can think about consequences, plan ahead, and adjust behavior. Still may need occasional help or structure for very complex tasks, stressful situations, or when insight is challenged.
Level X: Purposeful and Appropriate – Modified Independent Fully independent in society with only minor residual deficits (if any). Can handle multiple tasks, new learning, and abstract thinking effectively. May use compensatory strategies for subtle remaining issues.
This scale focuses on awareness, behavior, functional ability, and cognition and can be assigned based on physician observation and interaction. While an individual’s exact level on the scale can fluctuate or remain permanent, comprehension of this scale can assist Life Care Planners in the early stages of Life Care Plan development and may result in more targeted and impactful discussions with treating providers during the process of obtaining future treatment recommendations.
When Does an Attorney Need a Forensic Economic Earning Capacity Assessment?
Economic Loss: Establishing an Earnings Claim
When a party has been injured in a tort, the U.S. legal system allows for the recovery of special and general damages. Special damages are those that can be quantified and estimated with reasonable certainty. These may include lost earnings or earning capacity, fringe benefit losses, loss of financial support in wrongful-death matters, household service losses, or employment-related categories such as front pay and back pay in wrongful termination. General damages, those that cannot be quantified easily, cover non-economic harms, including pain and suffering or disfigurement. This article is specific to an earnings claim.
The claimant bears the burden of proving their economic losses. Establishing these losses typically requires a detailed review of the individual’s earnings history as well as other financial and employment documents to determine a reliable pre-injury earning capacity. A vocational expert often contributes by assessing the claimant’s occupational abilities, job prospects, and residual employability and earning capacity after the injury.
A vocational analysis identifies what the claimant could have earned before the injury and what they can earn post-injury. For example, if an individual could have earned $50,000 per year prior to the injury but, due to permanent or partial disability, is now capable of earning $25,000, a vocational expert may identify this annual differential. The economist then evaluates how that difference evolves over time, accounting for expected career progression, work-life expectancy, and economic assumptions.
The economist’s role is to take these vocational findings and determine the present value of the loss over the claimant’s expected work life. This requires applying growth assumptions, discount rates, work-life expectancy, fringe benefits, and other components to translate a year-by-year loss into an estimated economic damages figure that can be presented to the court.
Economic Loss: Disputing An Earnings Claim
Just as the opinions of a vocational expert and economist are complimentary when establishing an economic loss, they can be just as complimentary when disputing one.
Oftentimes there are competing vocational opinions regarding what a claimant may be able to earn post injury. The best an economist can do is assume based upon a hypothetical regarding earning capacity, as they have no expertise in evaluating the knowledge, skills and ability of a worker in a work capacity framework.
Once a differing vocational opinion establishes a post injury earning capacity, the economist's role remains the same: to estimate potential economic losses over the injured party's worklife expectancy.
Understanding Levels of Facility Care: A Life Care Planning Overview
In catastrophic injury, chronic illness, and long term disability cases, the level of facility based care required plays a central role in both cost projections and long term planning. When evaluating appropriate placement, a life care planner’s objective is to identify the least restrictive yet medically appropriate environment across the continuum of facility care. Each level carries its own staffing structure, regulatory requirements, medical capabilities, and cost implications.
Levels of Facility Based Care
When an individual’s medical needs exceed what can be safely managed in the home setting, facility-based care may be necessary. These facilities differ significantly in their services, level of supervision, care intensity, and overall cost.
1. Custodial Long-term Care Facility
Custodial long-term care facilities—commonly known as nursing homes—provide 24/7 custodial care with limited skilled nursing services. They support individuals who cannot live independently due to chronic illness or functional decline. Services generally include assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), medication administration, and social or recreational programming. The focus in these settings is long-term stability and support, rather than active rehabilitation.
2. Assisted Living and Memory Care Facilities
Assisted Living Facilities (ALFs) offer a supportive residential environment with help for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), medication reminders, meals, housekeeping, and 24-hour staffing. While some ALFs provide limited nursing oversight, they are not designed to manage extensive skilled medical needs.
Memory Care units—often housed within ALFs—serve individuals with cognitive impairment, dementia, or behavioral symptoms requiring structured supervision in a secured environment. These settings are best suited for individuals who:
need supervision rather than skilled nursing,
have cognitive or memory related limitations that create safety risks, and
require cueing, redirection, and 24/7 oversight without complex medical needs.
3. Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF)
Skilled Nursing Facilities provide short-term, medically necessary skilled care and rehabilitation, often following hospitalization. Services may include physical, occupational, and speech therapy; wound management; IV therapies; regular nursing assessments; and physician oversight. SNFs are transitional—they support individuals who no longer require hospital level care but are not yet ready to safely return home. Stays are typically goal oriented, emphasizing functional improvement and rehabilitation.
4. Long-term Acute Care Hospital (LTAC or LTACH)
Long-term Acute Care Hospitals deliver extended hospital level treatment for medically complex patients requiring 25 days or more of care. LTACs manage conditions that are too medically intensive for an SNF but stable enough to be treated outside a traditional hospital setting. Typical services include ventilator management, complex wound treatment, long-term IV antibiotics or infusion therapy, multiorgan system monitoring, daily physician rounds, and respiratory therapy. When LTAC level care is recommended, documentation must clearly establish medical necessity.
5. Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility (IRF)
Also known as acute rehabilitation, IRFs provide intensive physical, occupational, and speech therapy—typically three hours per day. Common indications include stroke recovery, spinal cord injury, major trauma, and neurological disorders. IRF care emphasizes rapid functional recovery, supported by daily physician oversight and a coordinated multidisciplinary team.
6. Hospitalization (Acute Care Hospital)
Acute care hospitals provide the highest level of medical treatment, focused on acute illness, injuries, and emergencies. Services may include emergency care, ICU management, surgical intervention, diagnostic testing, and stabilization of medically unstable conditions. Hospitalization is short-term and episodic, with the goal of stabilizing the patient before transitioning to IRF, LTAC, SNF, or homebased care.
From a life care planning perspective, accurately identifying the appropriate level of care is essential in developing a defensible damages assessment. Each facility type reflects important differences in medical necessity, functional status, long-term prognosis, and cost of care—making precise placement a critical component of the overall evaluation.
Understanding K-Levels and Their Role in Life Care Planning for Lower Extremity Amputees
In the realm of prosthetic rehabilitation, K-levels—a classification system developed by The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid (CMS)—play a critical role in determining a lower extremity amputee’s potential for mobility and function with a prosthesis. These levels, ranging from K0 to K4, not only guide clinical decisions but also significantly shape the structure and cost of a Life Care Plan. Understanding the implications of K-level classifications is essential to ensuring accurate, individualized care projections.
K0 indicates that the individual has no ability or potential to ambulate or transfer safely with or without assistance and would not benefit from a prosthesis. In these cases, a Life Care Plan will typically focus on wheelchair mobility, home modifications, and caregiver support, rather than prosthetic devices.
K1 describes limited household ambulation—individuals who can walk on level surfaces at a fixed cadence but do not navigate community terrain. For these patients, the Life Care Plan may include basic, single-speed prosthetic devices, fall prevention measures, wheelchairs and other ambulatory devices, and possibly home health services. The focus is often on maintaining independence within the home.
K2 individuals have the ability to navigate curbs, stairs, and uneven surfaces, albeit with limited speed and endurance. Life Care Plans for K2 amputees often include low-activity prosthetic components, regular follow-ups for prosthetic adjustment, physical therapy, and mobility training. Environmental modifications, — such as ramps or grab bars, — may also be necessary.
K3 represents individuals who can ambulate with variable cadence and perform most community activities, including vocational and recreational tasks. For this level, Life Care Plans can become significantly more complex. They may often involve microprocessor-controlled prosthetics, regular prosthetic upgrades, maintenance, and potentially vocational rehabilitation services.
K4 includes highly active individuals. Their Life Care Plans reflect high-performance, multi-functional prosthetic systems. These plans also incorporate intensive physical therapy, sports or recreational equipment, and enhanced prosthetic training.
The K-level assignment affects not only prosthetic eligibility and cost, but also long-term rehabilitation goals, psychosocial support, and occupational planning. Misjudging a patient’s K-level — or failing to account for changes over time — can result in a Life Care Plan that is medically inappropriate. In legal contexts, particularly when damages are contested, expert justification of the K-level and its downstream impact on lifetime care costs is essential for credible testimony and fair outcomes.
K-level classification is more than a clinical label—it is a predictive tool that drives major aspects of Life Care Planning for lower extremity amputees. Accurate, individualized assessment and thoughtful integration of the K-level into the Life Care Plan ensures both adequate care provision and defensible legal documentation.
Life Care Plans vs. Medical Cost Projections: Understanding the Key Differences
While both documents project future medical costs, life care plans and medical cost projections differ significantly in scope, methodology, and application.
Life Care Plans: The Comprehensive Approach
A life care plan is an in-depth document developed after a claimant establishes a treatment plan with their physician. It's built on extensive research including:
In-person interviews with the claimant
Direct communication with healthcare providers
Thorough medical record review
Detailed cost research
Comprehensive Coverage: Life care plans address all aspects of future care needs over an individual's expected lifetime, including medical care, rehabilitation services, medications, adaptive equipment, home care, facility services, and transportation.
Individualized Assessment: Each plan is tailored to the person's specific needs, considering pre-existing conditions while adhering to professional scope requirements.
Rigorous Standards: Development follows established guidelines from organizations like IARP and ICHCC, ensuring objective, unbiased assessment. The document remains dynamic and can be amended as needs change.
Medical Cost Projections: The Streamlined Alternative
Medical cost projections offer a condensed estimate of future medical needs, typically based on medical record review and research without in-person assessment. These projections often address only specific treatment components rather than comprehensive care needs.
Key Distinctions
Timing: Life care plans are developed after treatment stabilizes; medical cost projections can be completed during active treatment.
Methodology: Life care plans require direct contact with patients and providers; medical cost projections generally rely solely on record review.
Scope: Life care plans provide comprehensive future care planning; medical cost projections focus on specific treatment areas.
When to Use Each
Both documents serve settlement negotiations and fund allocation, but life care plans are the gold standard for litigation and testimony. Medical cost projections work well as initial frameworks for settlement discussions, with the understanding that a full life care plan may be developed later if comprehensive planning becomes necessary.
Bottom Line: Life care plans remain the definitive choice for thorough future care planning in legal contexts, while medical cost projections offer a practical starting point for preliminary assessments.
The Value of Household Services: Why Forensic Economists Matter in Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Cases
When a client suffers serious injuries or in the case of a wrongful death, economic damages extend beyond medical expenses and lost wages. One critical overlooked component is the loss of household services—everyday tasks that maintain a functioning home and support family members' wellbeing.
What Are Household Services?
Household services include activities such as:
· Interior cleaning and maintenance
· Meal preparation and kitchen management
· Home repairs and yard maintenance
· Grocery Shopping
· Household management and financial administration
When injury or death prevents someone from performing these services, families face significant economic burdens.
The Expert Team Approach
Effectively documenting and valuing household service losses may require collaboration between multiple experts in addition to testimony:
Vocational Rehabilitation Specialist/Life Care Planner
· Identifies specific household tasks the person can no longer perform
· Documents pre-injury capabilities and post-injury limitations
· Projects how these limitations may change over time
· May Recommend appropriate replacement services and their cost
Forensic Economist
· Projects future costs considering inflation and changing household needs
· Calculates present value of lifetime service losses
Working together, these experts create a comprehensive and defensible valuation. If you need assistance in presenting or rebutting household services as an element of economic loss, our team of vocational experts and lifecare planners along with our consulting economist can provide the expert services you need.
The Critical Role of Choosing the Right Physicians in Life Care Planning
Choosing the Right Physicians in Life Care Planning
Life care planning is a comprehensive, detailed process that outlines the current and future needs of individuals facing chronic illness, disability, or catastrophic injury. At its core, a successful life care plan depends on informed, evidence-based medical recommendations and opinions.
Why Physician Input Matters
Physicians provide the specialized medical knowledge essential to ensuring your life care plan reflects accurate diagnoses, prognoses, and appropriate treatment recommendations. Their expertise offers crucial clarity on the trajectory of a condition and the interventions likely required over time—including surgeries and procedures, therapies, medications, assistive devices, and long-term care needs.
The Need for the Right Physician
Not all physicians are equally suited to assist in life care plan development. The ideal medical consultant should be board-certified in a relevant specialty, experienced in long-term care management, and familiar with medico-legal documentation requirements.
For instance, a physiatrist (PM&R physician) may be better equipped to address functional limitations and rehabilitation needs, while a neurologist might be crucial for properly assessing traumatic brain injury cases. Their specialized insights help ensure that recommendations are realistic, defensible, and precisely tailored to the individual's medical and functional needs.
When circumstances require rebutting an opposing expert's life care plan, acquiring opinions from physicians who specialize in the same type of injury or treatment becomes extremely valuable. For example, a life care plan focusing on orthopedic injuries should ideally be reviewed by an orthopedic surgeon. In cases involving multiple injuries—such as orthopedic trauma, nerve damage, and brain injury—it's beneficial to engage multiple specialists (orthopedic surgeon, neurologist, and brain injury-focused PM&R physician) to address all components of the life care plan comprehensively.
Legal and Ethical Implications
In litigation, poorly chosen or unqualified physicians can significantly weaken the credibility of a life care plan. Conversely, highly respected and experienced medical consultants enhance its legitimacy, supporting fair and defensible recommendations. Moreover, ethical planning demands accuracy and transparency—both of which depend entirely on trusted, qualified medical input.
The Bottom Line
Selecting the appropriate physicians to consult on life care plans isn't merely a procedural formality—it's a cornerstone of high-quality, ethical, and defensible planning. Their guidance not only strengthens the plan's credibility but also safeguards the interests of all parties involved, especially the individual at the center of care.
When you're evaluating life care planning services, consider asking about the qualifications and specialties of the medical consultants involved. The right medical expertise can make the difference between a plan that withstands scrutiny and one that falls short when it matters most.
Life Care Planning: Key Factors for a Strong Case
Does timing of engagement matter?
If a claimant has just begun medical treatment, the long-term prognosis and full scope of injuries may be unknown. As Life Care Planners, we rely heavily on well-documented medical information to create accurate and defensible plans. Having updated medical documentation—and access to treating or consulting physicians who have a clear picture of the claimant’s injuries—allows for the most reliable recommendations. Consistent treatment not only gives clients a better chance at physical and emotional healing but also creates a clear timeline of injury, symptoms, and recovery efforts.
Has the claimant undergone all diagnostics required by their physician in order to determine a clear future plan of care? Are their medical diagnoses relatively stable?
Sometimes, physicians are unable to recommend additional future care because diagnostics are pending. Treaters are usually in a better position to make recommendations once any necessary imaging is complete. There are diagnostic procedures that can help determine the probable benefit of a future procedure or surgery with lasting results. It is important to know how long a physician would like to wait before scheduling a follow-up appointment after the diagnostic procedure in order to evaluate whether the claimant has achieved lasting benefit. Occasionally, claimants have also been placed on medication trials and are required to try them for a period of time prior to a physician being able to determine the extent of benefit.
Has the Life Care Planner been given access to all relevant materials?
Updated medical records are not the only pieces of information that are beneficial when issuing a reliable Life Care Plan. Pre-existing medical records for prior injuries or conditions are also helpful when speaking with providers, as they allow ongoing treatment to be directly connected to the injury sustained in the index event. Depositions of the claimant or treating physicians can further help paint a comprehensive picture.
Does the Life Care Planner have the ability to evaluate the claimant?
Oftentimes, the best way to gather information is directly from the claimant. Secure videoconferencing between the Life Care Planner and the claimant is an effective way for the expert to learn about the index event, identify any missing medical records, assess relevant work history or barriers to employment (in order to determine lost wages or necessary workplace accommodations), and gather information about pre-existing or comorbid conditions. Videoconferencing also allows the expert to observe durable medical equipment or supplies that may need to be replaced in the future, as well as any home modifications that may be required. Sometimes, deadlines do not allow for all diagnostic workups to be completed or all relevant and necessary records to be obtained. In these cases, Life Care Plans are dynamic documents that can be revised as the claimant’s treatment evolves.
Release of the 2025 Milliman Study: Implications for Life Care Planning in Lung Transplant Litigation
The release of the 2025 Milliman study on U.S. organ and tissue transplantation costs marks a significant update in the actuarial analysis of transplant-related expenses. This report, authored by Nick Ortner and Hanna Holzer of actuarial and consulting firm Milliman, provides detailed estimates of billed charges, utilization rates, and costs per member per month (PMPM) for various organ transplants, including single and double lung transplants. Compared to its predecessor, the 2022 Milliman study, the 2025 report incorporates a broader dataset and reflects updated methodologies that account for evolving market conditions and healthcare trends. For legal professionals and life care planners involved in litigation surrounding lung transplants, this report serves as a critical resource for estimating future costs.
One of the key advancements in the 2025 Milliman study is its expanded use of data sources, including the Milliman Consolidated Health Cost Guidelines Sources Database (CHSD) and Medicare Limited Data Sets (LDS). These additions provide a more comprehensive view of transplant costs across different payer systems, enhancing the accuracy of projections. In contrast, the 2022 study relied on narrower datasets and did not fully account for post-pandemic shifts in healthcare utilization. For instance, while both reports provide cost estimates for single and double lung transplants—$1,810,700 and $2,346,500 respectively in 2025—the newer report reflects annual increases in billed charges and utilization rates that are more aligned with current market realities.
The utility of Milliman studies in life care planning for litigation purposes lies in their detailed breakdown of transplant-related costs. These include pretransplant medical expenses, organ procurement charges, hospital admission fees, physician services during hospitalization, post-transplant follow-up care, and outpatient immunosuppressant therapies. Such granularity allows attorneys and life care planners to construct robust financial models for future medical needs.
However, one notable limitation is the study's reliance on national averages, which may obscure significant geographic variations in transplant costs. For example, lung transplant expenses can vary widely between urban centers with high transplant volumes and rural areas with limited access to specialized care. Despite its strengths, the Milliman study has limitations that warrant careful consideration. While the report provides valuable insights into average costs across age groups and transplant types, its applicability to geographically sensitive pricing remains limited. This poses challenges for litigation cases where regional disparities play a critical role in determining damages or settlement amounts. Additionally, the study is limited to costs billed during the pre-transplant hospitalization (approximately 30 days) as well as costs billed during the first 180 days post-discharge. This limitation requires the life care planner to supplement additional lifetime costs using other methods.
While the 2025 Milliman study represents an important tool for estimating lung transplant costs in legal contexts, its limitations must be acknowledged. Legal professionals should supplement Milliman data with localized cost analyses to ensure accurate life care planning. Future iterations of these reports could benefit from incorporating geographically stratified pricing models to address this critical gap. Nonetheless, the study's comprehensive approach to cost estimation continues to make it an indispensable resource for litigation involving complex medical procedures like lung transplantation.
Quarterbacking Present Value in Life Care Planning
Most certified life care planners – including Stokes & Associates- report lifetime future medical costs in current year dollars. One feature of the legal system is that awards for future pecuniary losses are determined at the time of adjudication. This creates a mismatch between when a cash flow is required to meet a future medically related liability and when the funds are awarded to pay that future liability. The process is analogous to a quarterback trying to complete a pass to a moving target downfield. Medical care costs are not stationary. How quickly they move (i.e., the inflation rate) depends on the type of future item or service and when it will be required.
Furthermore, an award given today to fund future medical care costs can also be put in motion. Our quarterback is on the move. The growth rate of an award intended to fund future medical care can be thought of as the interest earned or the rate of return it may generate. If medical care costs grow faster than anticipated or the rate of return is less than expected, the quarterback will have underthrown the target. Estimating how much money is required today to fund future medical care while accounting for future medical cost inflation and the rate of return on a present-value lump sum involves time value of money calculations. These calculations, performed by an economic expert, help ensure adequate funds are available to meet future liabilities.
NOTE:
This month’s newsletter is written by Dr. Shael Wolfson, the new Director of Economic Services at Stokes & Associates.
Dr. Wolfson consults in the field of Forensic Economics, specializing in personal injury, wrongful death, wrongful termination, medical malpractice, mass torts, and business interruption claims. He has provided testimony in matters before US District Courts and state courts in Colorado, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Nevada, Texas and West Virginia. He continues a legacy in the field that began in 1974 with his father, Dr. Melville Z. Wolfson, a Ph.D. economist and law school graduate. Dr. Wolfson has a bachelor’s degree in economics and finance (NYU), master’s degrees in Economics (FSU) and Financial Economics (UNO) as well as doctorate in Financial Economics (UNO).
Identifying Alternate Occupations: Key Factor in Vocational Assessments
Understanding the process of identifying alternate occupations is crucial when assessing evaluees who can no longer return to their previous work due to injuries. This process typically begins after a medical provider, consultant, or functional capacity evaluation determines the client's work capabilities and limitations.
A comprehensive vocational assessment starts with analyzing the client's work history. This analysis reveals transferrable skills, achieved competencies, and potential career directions that align with current physical capabilities. While the assessment often begins after Maximum Medical Improvement (MMI), early evaluation can facilitate successful work transition planning.
Geographical factors significantly impact viable employment options. Most positions should be available within reasonable commuting distance, typically 50 miles from the client's residence. However, local market conditions matter - a position may exist in theory but prove impractical if opportunities are scarce in the client's region or if typical commute patterns in the area differ.
Objective testing strengthens the vocational assessment. Achievement and intelligence evaluations provide empirical data about cognitive capabilities, similar to how functional capacity evaluations document physical abilities. Testing considerations include educational background, time elapsed since formal education, past work skill levels, and recent assessment history.
Professional qualifications encompass formal education, computer proficiency, specialized training, and certifications. Work experience often substitutes for formal education requirements - a factor confirmed through targeted labor market surveys. A detailed work history provides essential context for matching clients with appropriate alternate occupations.
The vocational assessment synthesizes these elements to identify viable employment options that match the client's capabilities, geographical constraints, and market realities. This systematic approach ensures recommendations will withstand scrutiny while serving the client's occupational needs.
Life Care Planning Considerations for Cancer
For those diagnosed with cancer, life care planning goes beyond medical treatments to incorporate the emotional, psychological, social, and practical aspects of living with the disease. Proper planning is essential in ensuring that cancer patients and their families can manage the complexities of care, maintain a quality of life, and address potential future challenges.
The primary focus of life care planning for cancer is often the medical treatment plan. This includes determining the type of treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, immunotherapy, or palliative care) and the expected outcomes. A life care plan should consider not only the immediate treatment options but also the long-term management of side effects such as fatigue, nausea, and pain. This includes decisions regarding follow-up care, potential recurrence, and ongoing surveillance.
Cancer diagnosis and treatment often come with significant emotional and psychological challenges. Patients may experience feelings of fear, anxiety, depression, and even post-traumatic stress as they cope with the uncertainty of their condition. It is essential for life care planning to include psychological support, such as counseling, therapy, or support groups, to help patients and their families manage the mental and emotional toll of cancer. Addressing the emotional health of the patient is integral to maintaining their overall well-being and can improve treatment outcomes by fostering a positive, proactive mindset.
Life care planning should also evaluate the patient’s social needs, including transportation to and from medical appointments and assistance with daily activities. In some cases, the patient may need to make arrangements for in-home care, particularly if their illness affects their ability to perform daily tasks independently.
While many cancer patients survive long-term, it is essential to note that treatment may not be curative. Palliative care, which focuses on managing symptoms and improving quality of life, should be incorporated into the life care plan, particularly if the cancer is terminal. This includes decisions about hospice care and pain management.
Life care planning for cancer is a dynamic, multifaceted process that takes into account a variety of physical, emotional, and logistical considerations. It is an ongoing dynamic process, adjusting as the patient’s condition changes over time.
Life Care Plan Considerations for Headache and Migraine Management
Managing migraine headaches, whether due to post-concussive syndrome or other causes, often requires a long-term approach supported by a well-structured life care plan. Migraines are recurring neurological disorders characterized by moderate to severe throbbing pain, typically on one side of the head. Common symptoms include nausea, vomiting, dizziness, visual disturbances, and heightened sensitivity to light, sound, and smell.
Some patients also experience a "migraine aura" before the onset of a headache, involving sensory changes such as flashing lights, ringing in the ears, or numbness and tingling, often on one side of the body—most commonly affecting the hand, arm, face, lips, or tongue. It is crucial to distinguish migraines from other headache types, such as tension-type, cluster, or rebound headaches, as each requires a unique treatment approach.
Key Considerations in Developing a Life Care Plan
When creating a life care plan for migraine management, collaboration with a neurologist or headache specialist is essential to ensure effective treatment recommendations. The field of headache medicine is constantly evolving, and available interventions may include:
Over-the-counter and prescription medications
Procedures and injections
Intravenous (IV) infusions
Wearable medical devices
Alternative therapies
Treatment Options
Medications
Over-the-counter and prescription medications are often the first line of defense. These may come in various forms, such as tablets, capsules, orally disintegrating tablets, liquids, nasal sprays, or powders. Injectable medications, such as Ajovy, Aimovig, and Emgality, are also widely used.Procedures and Injections
Interventions like occipital nerve blocks and Botox injections are commonly recommended for migraine and headache management.Intravenous Infusions
IV treatments, such as ketamine infusions, are gaining acceptance as effective options for managing chronic migraines.Wearable Devices
Devices like Nerivio, a remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) device, and other nerve stimulators are often prescribed after trial and error with more traditional methods.Alternative Therapies
Acupuncture has been shown to be a safe and effective complementary treatment for migraine relief.
Developing a Comprehensive Plan
To create an effective life care plan, life care planners should work closely with treating or consulting physicians or headache specialists. A thorough understanding of current treatment options and the patient's prognosis is essential to tailor a comprehensive, individualized plan that meets their specific needs.
New Frontiers in Life Care Planning
Life care planning, once primarily focused on medical needs and financial implications for catastrophic injuries, is evolving to address a broader spectrum when planning for long-term care.
One emerging area is the integration of mental health into life care plans. Conditions such as chronic depression, anxiety, and trauma can significantly impact an individual's quality of life and care needs. The importance of incorporating mental health services, including therapy and medication management, are services being increasingly included in comprehensive life care plans. This holistic approach ensures that the psychological well-being of the individual is prioritized alongside their physical health.
Another development is a growing emphasis on aging populations. This includes incorporating services like geriatric care management. Additionally, there is a focus on maintaining independence and quality of life for seniors through assistive technology, home modifications, and community-based support systems.
The intersection of technology and life care planning is also a rapidly expanding field. Telemedicine and remote monitoring devices are transforming how care is delivered and monitored. These technologies can enhance communication between healthcare providers, improve patient outcomes, and provide valuable data for life care planning. Moreover, artificial intelligence is being explored to analyze large datasets and identify potential care needs, leading to more personalized and proactive planning.
Finally, life care planning is extending beyond individuals, to include families and communities. Recognizing the impact of caregiving on family members, life care plans are beginning to incorporate support services for caregivers, such as respite care, counseling, and education. Additionally, there is a growing awareness of the role of community resources in supporting individuals with long-term care needs.
Life care planning is experiencing a transformative period. By addressing emerging areas such as mental health, aging, technology, and family and community support, life care planners are better equipped to meet the complex and evolving needs of individuals and families. This holistic approach to life care planning will ultimately help improve quality of life and ensure that individuals receive the support they need throughout their lifespan.
Scope of Practice for Life Care Planners
Certified life care planners adhere to a well-defined, peer-reviewed, and generally accepted set of professional standards and guidelines (“Standards).[1] The standards require that items in a life care plan be causally related to the indexed incident and have sufficient medical foundation. To this end, life care planners are required to consult with treating and/or consulting physicians to obtain medical recommendations that are translated into life care plan items. Consistent with this logic, life care planners should rely on medical professionals who are making recommendations within their specific scope of practice. For example, it would be inappropriate to ask a cardiologist for recommendations for future kidney dialysis. This would of course strain the credibility of the recommendation and likely violate certain rules of evidence.
Occasionally, treating physicians are unavailable for consultation for a variety of reasons, which may necessitate involvement of a consulting physician. This provider would presumably conduct a physical examination if possible and review relevant treatment records. The life care planner could then collaborate with the consultant for recommendations regarding future care. Again, it would be inappropriate to ask this consultant for recommendations outside of their scope of practice like the example above.
But what happens when the consulting physician is also acting as the life care planner who is costing out their own medical recommendations? While it may be convenient or beneficial at times to combine these different roles, there are inherent concerns which may jeopardize the admissibility of their opinions. For example, we routinely review life care plans generated by physicians who do not consult with the treating doctors and base their entire life care plans on their own recommendations. This practice is acceptable when the physician life care planner is making recommendations specific to their medical specialty. The Standards state that the life care planner “Seeks recommendations from other qualified professionals and/or relevant sources for inclusion of items and services outside the life care planner’s scope of practice (p.17).” Routinely we see physician life care planners offering recommendations outside of their professional scope. Most frequently, we see recommendations by physiatrists (physical medicine and rehabilitation specialists) for orthopedic surgery, detailed ongoing psychological or mental health treatment, routine neurology follow ups, or other ongoing routine care that would otherwise require the input of the specialist providing the care.
A recent federal court decision for the Western District of Missouri involved a motion to exclude the plaintiff’s expert physician life care planner based on a Daubert challenge, which was granted[2]. In this case, plaintiff’s counsel hired a physiatrist to produce a life care plan. According to the ruling, the physiatrist’s testimony did not meet the standards for evidence to be admissible under Rule 702, which states that an expert “must show by a preponderance of the evidence both that the expert is qualified to render the opinion and that the methodology underlying his conclusions is scientifically valid.”
The decision added that the defense challenged the qualifications of the expert, his methodologies, and the reliability of his opinions. Defendants stated that the physiatrist opined that ongoing treatment was necessary in a specialty for which he or she had little to no knowledge or experience. The defendant also contended that the physiatrist did not speak with the patient’s treating physicians. Accordingly, the physiatrist affirmed that his opinions were not based on medical records, a review of literature, or conversations with the patient’s treating physicians. The court concluded there must be support in the medical records, from a treating specialist, or other expert in that specialty for the physiatrist’s opinions to be reliable. As the court stated, “merely possessing a medical degree is not sufficient to permit a physician to testify concerning any medical-related issue.” Furthermore, the physiatrist admitted that he lacks the expertise to determine costs of future medical care and leaves the process of doing so to the “actuary department.”
In order to ensure that we provide credible, valid, and defensible reports, we endeavor to confirm that the medical foundation underlying our plans falls within the generally accepted professional standards that guide our work. We are also mindful of the important legal standards that govern the ultimate admissibility of our opinions.
[1] IARP/Life Care Planning IALCP Section (2022). Standards of Practice for Life Care Planners (4th Ed.). IARP.
[2] Hartley v. Kawasaki Motors. USDC for W. Div, St. Joseph Division, Case No. 20-06098-CV-SJ-GAF (2022)
Stokes & Associates Experts Publish in Seminal New Textbook: Handbook of Medical Aspects of Disability and Rehabilitation for Life Care Planning
The grassroots of life care planning can be traced back to the mid to late 1970’s that evolved out of case management with concepts, methodologies, and tenets in the field of rehabilitation counseling. Today, life care plans are utilized in many personal injury cases for forensic purposes to outline the future medical and related needs of an individual as the result of an injury or illness along with associated costs of that care. The life care planning process has a strong medically-based element for determining the medical and rehabilitative needs of an injured individual.
Out of a desire to provide opportunity for practicing life care planners to review and obtain a re-understanding of the medical aspects of injury they learned early in their studies, Drs. Virgil Robert May III, Richard Bowman, and Steven Barna recently published a text in May 2024, entitled, “Handbook of Medical Aspects of Disability and Rehabilitation for Life Care Planning”.1
Contributors to this textbook came from a team of various experts, including medical and doctoral level practitioners, covering key areas of traumatic injury and resulting disability that are often faced by life care planners. The book is comprised of 22 chapters, encompassing a variety of topics, including but not limited to:
independent medical evaluations,
psychosocial aspects of chronic illness and disability,
the pediatric life care and vocational evaluation,
acquired brain injury,
traumatic brain injury,
traumatic spinal cord injury,
amputations,
pain medicine and life care planning,
burn trauma,
the medical cost projection.
The chapter entitled “Third-Party Provider Systems” was written by our very own Vocational and Life Care Plan experts, Larry S. Stokes, Aaron M. Wolfson, Todd S. Capielano, Lacy H. Sapp, and Ashley G. Lastrapes. In this chapter, they discuss disability and work; impairment ratings; state, federal, Jones Act, longshore and harbor worker’ compensation, as well as Social Security Administration. We want to acknowledge their hard work, research, and dedication to their contribution to this book publication.
Please feel free to contact our office to discuss the chapter.
Appropriate Funding of Services in Life Care Planning
A primary objective of a life care plan is to appropriately fund future medical treatment related to a specific injury or incident. The plan should neither overfund nor underfund necessary items and services. When developing a life care plan, it's crucial to consider the potential overlapping of services to prevent "double dipping," which can lead to overfunding. Conversely, underfunding can occur if the entire cost of a service is not accounted for.
Overfunding Example: Consider an individual with a traumatic brain injury who lives at home and requires 24-hour attendant care. If this person also needs inpatient rehabilitation, the cost of attendant care should be deducted during the inpatient rehabilitation period. Another example involves medication needs. If an individual is already prescribed a once-daily muscle relaxer but will require it three times daily following a recommended surgery, the life care planner should only fund the additional two doses during the post-operative period.
Avoiding Underfunding: To prevent underfunding, a life care planner must consider the entire cost of each recommendation. For instance, when accounting for surgery costs, the planner should obtain all associated expenses, including:
Physician fees
Assistant physician/surgeon fees (if needed)
Facility fees
Anesthesia fees
Hardware/implant fees (if applicable)
Neuromonitoring fees (if necessary)
Additionally, the life care planner must factor in all pre- and post-operative treatment costs, such as:
Pre-operative labs and diagnostics
Post-operative physician follow-up visits
Physical therapy
Medications
Imaging
Another example is the recommendation of a power wheelchair. Beyond the initial cost, the life care planner should consider expenses for:
Wheelchair maintenance
Battery replacements
Necessary accessories
It is standard practice in life care planning to evaluate how one recommendation may affect others. Life care planners should thoroughly assess each recommendation to account for potential service overlaps or to ensure the entire cost of each service or item is included.
By adhering to these principles, life care planners can create more accurate and comprehensive plans that appropriately fund the future medical needs of injured individuals.
Case Study: Life Care Planning and Hand Injuries
John, a 35-year-old construction worker, suffered a severe hand injury in a workplace accident, resulting in the amputation of three fingers on his dominant hand. The injury has left him unable to perform his job and carry out daily activities.
A life care planner is brought in to assess John's situation and develop a comprehensive life care plan. The planner consults with John's hand surgeon and a pain management specialist to understand the extent of his injuries and future medical needs. They recommend ongoing pain management, occupational therapy, and potential future surgeries to improve hand function.
The life care planner also assesses John's need for assistive devices and adaptive tools to help him regain independence in daily activities. They recommend a prosthetic device for his missing fingers and training on how to use it effectively. Additionally, the planner identifies the need for vocational rehabilitation to help John explore new career options that accommodate his injury.
The life care plan outlines all of John's anticipated future medical expenses, including surgeries, therapies, medications, assistive devices, and vocational rehabilitation. This comprehensive plan helps John and his legal team understand the long-term financial impact of his injury and seek appropriate compensation.
By addressing John's medical, functional, and vocational needs, the life care plan helps him navigate the challenges of living with a hand injury and maximize his quality of life.
Life Care Plan Considerations for Hearing Impairments
Life care planners are routinely engaged for cases involving clients who require hearing aids and assistive technology due to injury-related hearing loss. There are two main types of hearing loss:
1. Conductive hearing loss: Caused by obstructions in the outer or middle ear, often treatable with medication or surgery.
2. Sensorineural hearing loss: Caused by inner ear or auditory nerve damage, typically permanent. Often seen in life care planning cases involving explosions or head trauma.
Life care planners should consult with audiologists and/or ENTs to obtain recommendations for current and future treatment needs. For significant sensorineural hearing loss requiring hearing aids, life care plans must specify the type (receiver-in-ear, behind-the-ear, or invisible-in-canal), which may require custom ear molds at additional cost. Hearing aid fittings, routine cleaning, and re-programming appointments should also be considered. Ongoing audiologist follow-ups and hearing tests are necessary as hearing loss can progress over time. It is important to ensure that life care planners inquire about hearing aid warranties and replacement schedules.
For work/school accommodations, consider additional assistive technology that pairs with hearing aids, such as:
Roger Clip-On Mics for direct feed from speakers/presenters
Personal amplifiers to increase sound levels and reduce background noise in various environments.
Life care plans must also include replacement batteries for hearing aids and assistive technology, if not rechargeable.
In some cases, an ENT evaluation may be required before hearing aid fitting, especially if testing reveals hearing loss asymmetry, which could indicate neuromas or other inner ear/brain trauma requiring further diagnostics. If the client also experiences dizziness, balance issues, or tinnitus, additional care from a neuro-otologist or vestibular therapist may be warranted.
Future Cost Considerations for Organ Transplants
Forecasting the complicated medical needs of individuals leading up to and following organ transplants requires careful attention to detail. Organ transplant candidates are often some of the most acutely ill evaluees life care planners encounter. These patients require vigilant medical surveillance prior to transplant, must endure the stress and fear of being taken off the waiting list, and must be close enough to a transplant center to respond to available transplant organs at a moment’s notice. Given the complexity of the transplant surgery itself, the iatrogenic effects of lifetime immunosuppressant medications, and the multitude of potential complications, collecting reliable cost estimates for transplants can be challenging.
The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) is a private, non-profit organization that manages the national organ transplant system. UNOS through its Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN), matches donors to recipients, manages the waiting lists, develops policies, evaluates procedures, and most importantly, maintains a database on every transplant performed in the United States. This comprehensive database allows for detailed research regarding the typical costs for single-organ, double-organ, or tissue transplants.
Milliman is an independent risk management, benefits, and technology firm that publishes the most comprehensive analysis of transplant costs in the United States. The firm issues an updated study every three years, with the most recent being published in January of 2020. The Milliman report includes transplant costs that cover the 30-day period prior to the transplant, the cost for organ procurement, the cost of the actual transplant (includes medical and hospital fees), and the costs associated with the first 180 days following the transplant. The report presents costs in several ways including the PMPM (per member per month) and the “billed” charge. It is the billed charge that is appropriate for use according to generally accepted standards of practice for life care planning.
As costs are limited to specific pre- and post-transplant time frames, it is important to collaborate with the treating or consulting specialist to address likely costs that extend beyond the 180 days after transplant. As mentioned in a previous post, issues such as organ rejection, infectious diseases, and side effects of immunosuppressant medications, can put organ recipients in the position of “trading one disease for another.” Additionally, the issue of mortality rates and life expectancy following transplants requires strong medical foundation and consultation.
Life care planning for transplant cases can be complicated. Future care involves multiple bodily systems, frequent medical complications, and varied side effects from the lifelong medications required to avoid organ rejection. It takes an experienced team to accurately plan for and reliably research the cost of future care.