Why isn't "agitated, redirected" enough in a behavior note?
Because it doesn't say what happened. "Agitated" is a label, and "redirected" doesn't say how. Follow-up questions turn it into a useful note: what the resident did and said, what support the caregiver offered, and what the resident did next. Every added detail must come from what actually happened.
Read the video's captions
Here is a fictional example of why follow-up questions matter.
The first note: “Maya was agitated. Redirected.”
When we ask what happened, the caregiver explains:
The television became louder. Maya covered her ears and said, “Too loud.”
The caregiver offered a quieter table. Maya chose it and began eating.
The clearer note says exactly that: “The television became louder. Maya covered her ears and said, “Too loud.” I offered a quieter table. Maya chose it and began eating.”
Now another caregiver can understand the situation, the support, and the observed result.
Those added details came from the example’s caregiver account. They were not invented to improve the wording.
This is the kind of clarification Divinity’s approach is designed to support.
Better wording is only useful when the underlying facts are accurate.
A fictional example
Here is a fictional example of why follow-up questions matter. The first note says:
Maya was agitated. Redirected.
That note is short, and it isn't false. But the next caregiver can't do much with it. What did "agitated" look like? What did "redirected" mean? What happened afterwards?
What follow-up questions uncover
When we ask the caregiver what happened, the story becomes clear. The television became louder. Maya covered her ears and said, "Too loud." The caregiver offered a quieter table. Maya chose it and began eating.
The clearer note
The clearer note says exactly that:
The television became louder. Maya covered her ears and said, "Too loud." I offered a quieter table. Maya chose it and began eating.
Now another caregiver can understand:
- the situation: the television became louder
- the support: a quieter table
- the observed result: Maya chose it and began eating
The details come from the caregiver, not the writer
In this example, the added details came from the caregiver's own account. They were not invented to improve the wording.
That matters. Better wording is only useful when the underlying facts are accurate. A note that sounds thorough but includes details nobody observed can't be trusted.
How Divinity approaches this
This is the kind of clarification Divinity's approach is designed to support: follow-up questions that turn the caregiver's own account into a clear note.
Frequently asked questions
What does "redirected" mean in a behavior note?
On its own, not much. Say what you actually did, such as offering a quieter table, and what the resident did next.
Can I add details to make a note clearer?
Only details that actually happened. Follow-up questions should bring out the caregiver's real account, not add wording that isn't true.
See whether Divinity fits your home
A short call, specific to your home and your staff. Or start on your own with a free trial. Prefer to look first? Watch the 90-second tour.