Will AI replace Occupational Therapy Assistants?

Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 22 official task statements scored for Occupational Therapy Assistants (United States, SOC 31-2011), 3% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 14 out of 100 (range 10–20, band: minimal). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.

Which tasks in “Occupational Therapy Assistants” can AI already do?

The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Perform clerical duties, such as scheduling appointments, collecting data, or documenting health insurance billings” (61/100, high); “Order any needed educational or treatment supplies” (56/100, partial); “Report to supervisors, verbally or in writing, on patients' progress, attitudes, and behavior” (42/100, partial). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.

Which tasks in “Occupational Therapy Assistants” stay human?

About 88% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Transport patients to and from the occupational therapy work area” (0/100, minimal); “Assemble, clean, or maintain equipment or materials for patient use” (0/100, minimal); “Aid patients in dressing and grooming themselves” (0/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.

What should someone working in “Occupational Therapy Assistants” do about AI?

Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 3% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 88% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.

How is the AI exposure score for Occupational Therapy Assistants calculated?

Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 22 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.

US dataswitch to UK

Occupational Therapy Assistants

instructing or assisting in instructing, attending continuing education classes and aiding patients in dressing and grooming themselves. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

AI changes the edges of this job, not the middle: maintaining and promoting a positive attitude toward clients and their treatment programs is work software can't reach.

Your move: what you can actually do about this ↓

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 3%
changing shape: 9%
staying human: 88%

These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.

Whole-job exposure score 14 out of 100 (10–20 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, across 22 scored tasks. The number is the support for the sentence above it, not a headline about anyone’s future.

How we know this

What is measured: Every published task statement for occupational therapy assistants is rated on five dimensions: can a model produce the output, does the work need a body in a room, does it need a legally accountable person, does it depend on a person being trusted in the moment, and how much data exists. A published formula turns those five ratings into the score; the model never writes the number.

How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.

Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-05. Read the full method.

What shifts is performing clerical duties, such as scheduling appointments, collecting data or documenting health insurance billings: the paper around the work, not the work.

Your week, as this page understands it

Assist occupational therapists in providing occupational therapy treatments and procedures. May, in accordance with state laws, assist in development of treatment plans, carry out routine functions, direct activity programs, and document the progress of treatments. Generally requires formal training. The job title says “occupational therapy assistants”. The real job is the part underneath: maintaining and promoting a positive attitude toward clients and their treatment programs. That is the thing someone has to be right about.

The exposed part of this job is specific, and we won’t pretend it is coming back. But occupational therapy assistants is not one task. It is 22 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is maintaining and promoting a positive attitude toward clients and their treatment programs, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 3%
changing shape: 9%
staying human: 88%

These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.

How we know this

How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.

Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-05. Read the full method.

Your job, task by task

These are the official task statements for this occupation, in plain English, sorted by what the evidence says is happening to each one. The official wording sits under every line so you can check the rewrite against it.

3 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.

Shifting to AI

1 task

Tasks today’s tools can already do most of. This is the part we will not soften: where these rows are the bulk of your week, the week changes.

Performing clerical duties, such as scheduling appointments, collecting data or documenting health insurance billings
This is reading one thing and writing another: clerical duties in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Perform clerical duties, such as scheduling appointments, collecting data, or documenting health insurance billings.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 61 out of 100 (57–65 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Scheduling, data entry and billing paperwork is standard office work that software already handles well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 4/4.

Changing shape

2 tasks

Tasks where the machine takes the producing and a person keeps the checking, the deciding, or the answering-for-it. For most jobs this is the biggest group, and it is where "transformation, not termination" is literally visible.

Reporting to supervisors, verbally or in writing, on patients' progress, attitudes and behavior
The software now makes the first pass at supervisors, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Report to supervisors, verbally or in writing, on patients' progress, attitudes, and behavior.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 42 out of 100 (38–46 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Writing up a patient's progress for a supervisor is standard note-taking that software drafts well from existing records.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Ordering any needed educational or treatment supplies
The software now makes the first pass at any needed educational, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Order any needed educational or treatment supplies.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Reordering clinic supplies is routine ordering work, though someone still checks what is actually running low on the shelf.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Staying human

19 tasks

Tasks that stay with a person, because they happen in the physical world, because the rules need someone accountable, or because the value is that a specific person does them.

Instructing or assisting in instructing
This work happens in the physical world: instructing, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Instruct, or assist in instructing, patients and families in home programs, basic living skills, or the care and use of adaptive equipment.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 5 out of 100 (0–12 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Showing a patient and family how to use adaptive equipment happens in the room, and they need to trust the person showing them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Maintaining and promoting a positive attitude toward clients and their treatment programs
This work happens in the physical world: a positive attitude toward clients, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Maintain and promote a positive attitude toward clients and their treatment programs.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 1 out of 100 (0–5 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Keeping a client feeling positive about their treatment is a relationship, not a work product anything else can turn out.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 4/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Implementing or assisting occupational therapists with implementing
This work happens in the physical world: occupational therapists, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Implement, or assist occupational therapists with implementing, treatment plans designed to help clients function independently.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 3 out of 100 (0–7 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Carrying out a therapy plan means guiding a patient physically, and a licensed therapist must stand behind the treatment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Monitoring patients' performance in therapy activities
This work happens in the physical world: patients' performance, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Monitor patients' performance in therapy activities, providing encouragement.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 3 out of 100 (0–7 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Watching how a patient moves during therapy and encouraging them through it depends on being there with them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Observing and recording patients' progress
This work happens in the physical world: patients' progress, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Observe and record patients' progress, attitudes, and behavior and maintain this information in client records.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 18 out of 100 (11–25 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Recording progress is routine paperwork, but the observing that fills it in happens face to face during therapy.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Selecting therapy activities to fit patients' needs and capabilities
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for therapy activities, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Select therapy activities to fit patients' needs and capabilities.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 27 out of 100 (20–34 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Choosing which activities suit a patient is a judgment call from documented options, but it rests on knowing the person.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Attending continuing education classes
The ratings behind this row put education classes well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Attend continuing education classes.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 15 out of 100 (8–22 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over.
The rating behind it: Course material is widely available online, but the point is that the assistant personally completes the training to stay certified.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Show the other 12 tasks

Communicating and collaborating with other healthcare professionals involved with the care of a patient
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles other healthcare professionals and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Communicate and collaborate with other healthcare professionals involved with the care of a patient.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 26 out of 100 (19–33 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Handing over patient information between professionals is largely written, and drafting those summaries is something software does reasonably well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Attending care plan meetings to review patient progress and update care plans
staying human
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for care plan meetings, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Attend care plan meetings to review patient progress and update care plans.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 23 out of 100 (16–30 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Care plan notes can largely be drafted from records, but the meeting itself is a discussion among the treating team.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Altering treatment programs to obtain better results if treatment is not having the intended effect
staying human
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for treatment programs, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Alter treatment programs to obtain better results if treatment is not having the intended effect.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 20 out of 100 (13–27 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Records can flag that treatment is not working, but changing the plan is the licensed therapist's call.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Designing fabricate or repairing assistive devices or making adaptive changes to equipment or environments
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: fabricate, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Design, fabricate, or repair assistive devices or make adaptive changes to equipment or environments.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (2–16 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Ideas for adapting a device can be suggested, but making and fitting the thing is handwork.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Evaluating the daily living skills or capacities of clients with physical
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: the daily living skills, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Evaluate the daily living skills or capacities of clients with physical, developmental, or mental health disabilities.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 7 out of 100 (0–14 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Judging what someone can manage day to day means watching them actually try it in person.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Working under the direction of occupational therapists
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: the direction of occupational therapists, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Work under the direction of occupational therapists to plan, implement, or administer educational, vocational, or recreational programs that restore or enhance performance in individuals with functional impairments.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 7 out of 100 (0–14 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: A program can be planned on paper, but running it with clients happens in the room.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Teaching patients how to deal constructively with their emotions
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: patients how, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Teach patients how to deal constructively with their emotions.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 5 out of 100 (1–9 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Helping someone handle difficult feelings works because a real person is sitting with them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 4/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Demonstrating therapy techniques, such as manual or creative arts or games
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: therapy techniques, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Demonstrate therapy techniques, such as manual or creative arts or games.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 4 out of 100 (0–11 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Showing someone how a therapy exercise or activity works is a physical demonstration in front of them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Assisting educational specialists or clinical psychologists in administering situational or diagnostic tests to measure client's abilities or progress
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: educational specialists, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Assist educational specialists or clinical psychologists in administering situational or diagnostic tests to measure client's abilities or progress.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 4 out of 100 (0–11 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Running a diagnostic test on a client means sitting with them, and a licensed specialist must oversee it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Aiding patients in dressing and grooming themselves
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: patients, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Aid patients in dressing and grooming themselves.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Helping someone get dressed is hands-on care that cannot be done at a distance.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Assembling, cleaning or maintaining equipment or materials for patient
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Assemble, clean, or maintain equipment or materials for patient use.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Cleaning and putting together therapy equipment is physical work with the equipment in hand.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Transporting patients to and from the occupational therapy work area
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: patients, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Transport patients to and from the occupational therapy work area.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Moving a patient to and from the therapy area is physical help given in person.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 1/4.

What this job pays, and how many people do it

Median pay: $72,300a year, the middle of the range, so half earn more and half earn less.bls-oews, 2025 · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
How we know this
Source: bls-oews
Reference period: May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
Rounding: Shown as published.
People doing this job: 51,290in the US, 2025.bls-oews · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)

What is deliberately not here: a forecast of how many of these jobs exist in ten years. Where an official projection exists for a market we publish it with its vintage; where it does not, we leave the space empty rather than borrow the other country’s number.

Why this is shifting

The reason is boringly specific. Most of what is shifting here is reading one thing and writing another: clerical duties in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: performing clerical duties, such as scheduling appointments, collecting data or documenting health insurance billings and reporting to supervisors, verbally or in writing. What it cannot do is be there in the room, and that is still where a positive attitude toward clients get done. Which is why this page talks about your tasks changing, not your job ending.

Your move

Over a pint: what I’d tell you if you were my friend

Start with what does not change: maintaining and promoting a positive attitude toward clients and their treatment programs is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.

So, given all that: 3% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 9% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 88% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 22 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.

So the thing worth your attention is not the job going away. It is the layer around it. Performing clerical duties, such as scheduling appointments, collecting data or documenting health insurance billings is the part turning into software, and being the person who understands that layer is worth money.

This week: one thing

Ask the one question. Find whoever is bringing new software into your workplace (the manager, the office, whoever runs the system) and ask them what it is meant to do to clerical duties, and what it is not meant to touch. Ten minutes, this week, before anyone decides it for you.

What you end up holding: a straight answer about what is actually being rolled out, and when
How long it takes: ten minutes

If there’s nobody obvious to ask, or you’d rather not ask your manager: Put the same question to your union rep, your shift lead or the person who has been there longest, in person, over a break. Same ten minutes, same answer, and you will usually get a straighter one. Write down what they say. The note is the artifact, and it tells you whether a positive attitude toward clients are in scope or not. Nothing to log into, no license needed.

Over the next 90 days

Get inside the tool rollout rather than waiting for it. Over the next ninety days, ask to be in the group that tests, checks or signs off whatever new system arrives near reporting to supervisors, verbally or in writing, on patients' progress, attitudes and behavior. It is usually an unglamorous seat that nobody fights for, and it is the one that decides how the software is used on your job rather than to it.

Over the next 12 months

On this evidence I would not retrain out of this job, and I will say that plainly rather than hedge it. The task list here is dominated by work that stays with a person. What I would do with a year is get formally recognised for the layer around it (the systems, the compliance, the planning), so you are the one who understands the software instead of the one it is done to. Before you pay for anything, use CareerOneStop - Find local training. It is free, it is the Labor Department's own service, and it is listed below with the rest of the free routes.

The roads out of here, and why I am not sending you down them

I looked at the obvious moves out of this job, and here is what I found.

I checked the 12 nearest US occupations to occupational therapy assistants (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was occupational therapy aides: it pays 45.8% less and there are far fewer of those jobs than of yours. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 14/100 here, with only 3% of the task list in the top band, and “instruct, or assist in instructing, patients and families in home programs, basic…” is not work that hands over cleanly. None of them beats deepening what you already have.

How that was checked: this job was compared against all 830 US occupations in this release on their official task statements, and the 12 nearest were examined one by one. A move that turns on an industry, an employer or a qualification rather than on the work itself will not show up in a check like that. And this release carries no licence register, so anything you are weighing needs that looked up separately.

3 moves I checked and rejected

These are the obvious-looking jumps. They are here with their reasons rather than quietly dropped, because the ones that fail are worth knowing about. It is one less thing to turn over at night.

Occupational Therapy Aides
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already demonstrate therapy techniques, and their equivalent is to demonstrate therapy techniques. Across both published task lists that is about 37% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: It is a pay cut, in those words: $39,160 against your $72,300, 45.8% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice. And it is a narrow door: about 4,310 of those jobs against 51,290 of yours (OEWS May 2025), 8% as many seats.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Physical Therapist Assistants
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already attend continuing education classes, and their equivalent is to attend or conduct continuing education courses, seminars, or in-service activities. Across both published task lists that is about 6% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 6% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Psychiatric Aides
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already aid patients in dressing and grooming themselves, and their equivalent is to provide patients with assistance in bathing, dressing, or grooming, demonstrating these skills as…. Across both published task lists that is about 6% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 6% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: $44,910 against your $72,300, 37.9% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
Look at that job’s page anyway →

What I’d stop worrying about

A friend tells you what not to spend fear on. This is that list.

The headline number you read somewhere
The big “X% of jobs” figures are about the whole economy, not about you. The number that describes your job is on this page: 3% of its task weight, across 22 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.
The headlines about your trade disappearing
They are usually about the technology, not the timetable. Changes to work like maintaining and promoting a positive attitude toward clients and their treatment programs arrive through rules, insurance and money, slowly and visibly. This page tracks the task evidence and will move when it moves.
Retraining out of a job that is holding up
On this evidence I would not spend money leaving. Spend it on the layer around the job instead: the tools, the paperwork, the planning. That is where the change actually is.
The “obvious” next job everyone suggests
I checked the obvious moves and most of them did not survive. The reasons are printed with the routes above, including the pay and the gate. A move that fails on the numbers is worth knowing about so you can stop turning it over at night.

You are reading the United States figures

The United Kingdom splits this work across more than one official group, of which Health associate professionals n.e.c. is the closest. The pay and employment figures are not directly comparable, and we do not average them together.

Switch to the United Kingdom page →partial match

In UK official statistics this job is counted as Health associate professionals n.e.c.. Pay and employment stay on this page’s own group; the task list and the scores do not cross over.

Your route through this

Where to go next, and what it costs

Free, and complete

The moves above cost nothing. These are the real services that go with them: public, government-funded, and free at the point of use. Nothing on this page is behind an email address or a payment.

Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Find local training
Search what's running near you, from the Labor Department's own database, before anyone sells you a course.
Free to search; individual programs vary, and some are funded
Anywhere in the US:
American Job Center locator
An American Job Center will sit down with you for free. Find yours by ZIP code.
Free
- CareerOneStop local help hub
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Licensed occupations finder
Check what your state actually requires before you pay for anything.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop
Free

Why there is no community here

Collab365, who build this site, run paid Spaces for a small number of subjects, and none of them is built for this job. We are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.

So the free services listed on this page are the whole answer, and it is the same answer we would give a friend.

Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for occupational therapy assistants launches. Nothing else.

That did not look like an email address, so nothing was saved. Have another go below.

We could not save that. The fault is ours, not yours, and your address was not stored. Please try again later.

No Space for occupational therapy assistants yet. Should there be one?

Collab365 Spaces is built by the same people as this site. We find the problems that AI and automation are creating inside one kind of work, then solve them as short courses, briefings and Blueprints. Each Space is the community too, so the research and the people doing your job are in the same place.

What a Space actually is, in full

Collab365 launches new communities where the need is real. If one for occupational therapy assistants existed, with researched problems, courses and people in the same boat, would you want in?

Your email

We use your email address for one thing: to tell you if a Space for occupational therapy assistants launches. We never sell it, never use it for unrelated marketing, and every email has a one-click unsubscribe. Our privacy policy has the full version.

This unlocks nothing. Every figure, every row and every step on this page is already yours, whether you fill this in or not.

No deadline on any of this. The page will still be here, and the data is refreshed on a published schedule rather than when someone wants a headline.

Questions people ask about this job

Will AI replace Occupational Therapy Assistants?: Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 22 official task statements scored for Occupational Therapy Assistants (United States, SOC 31-2011), 3% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 14 out of 100 (range 10–20, band: minimal). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.
Which tasks in “Occupational Therapy Assistants” can AI already do?: The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Perform clerical duties, such as scheduling appointments, collecting data, or documenting health insurance billings” (61/100, high); “Order any needed educational or treatment supplies” (56/100, partial); “Report to supervisors, verbally or in writing, on patients' progress, attitudes, and behavior” (42/100, partial). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.
Which tasks in “Occupational Therapy Assistants” stay human?: About 88% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Transport patients to and from the occupational therapy work area” (0/100, minimal); “Assemble, clean, or maintain equipment or materials for patient use” (0/100, minimal); “Aid patients in dressing and grooming themselves” (0/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.
What should someone working in “Occupational Therapy Assistants” do about AI?: Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 3% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 88% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.
How is the AI exposure score for Occupational Therapy Assistants calculated?: Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 22 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.

Where these numbers come from

Worth knowing about these figures

The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
3 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.

Task statements: onet-dbProcessing: catalogue-bridge → onet-im-rt-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
Task weights: onet-db (im-rt)
Scores: Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-05.
Pay and employment: bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))

Figures on this page come from release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Every release keeps its own permanent address, so a figure you cite in March is still there, unchanged, in November.

The plain-English wording on this page is assembled directly from the task statements and the published ratings, not written by hand for this occupation. That is why it is specific, and it is also why we say so.

The routes and free resources further up are today’s, not the release’s (last reviewed 2026-08-05). A route is an offer, not a historical fact, so it moves on its own clock.

How we score a job Download this release Look up another job

Using these figures?

Cite this

Everything on this site is published under CC BY 4.0. Quote it, chart it, sell something built on it. Just say where it came from, and cite the dated release rather than the site, so the figure you quote stays checkable.

Plain text

Collab365 (2026). Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1 (methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0). https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1. Licensed CC BY 4.0. Built with O*NET data (USDOL/ETA, CC BY 4.0); ONS data (Open Government Licence v3.0); GAISI task framework (arXiv:2507.22748, MIT); BLS data (public domain).

BibTeX

@misc{collab365futureproof2026q41,
  title        = {Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1},
  author       = {{Collab365}},
  year         = {2026},
  url          = {https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1},
  note         = {Release 2026-q4.1, methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0, CC BY 4.0}
}

Permalink

https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1

Data as of release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Releases never change after publication; when the figures move, a new dated release is published beside this one and this one stays exactly where it is.