Verified against ChatGPT · 2026-08-13
Compress a multi-page care plan into a one-page summary the whole family can actually follow
Distills a long, clinical-language care plan into a one-page action summary for family members coordinating a loved one's care — organized by who does what and when, with the original plan preserved as the source of truth.
The prompt
Ready to copy — highlighted parts are example details you can swap.
Families coordinating a relative's care often get a multi-page care plan full of clinical language that never gets fully read by anyone but the person managing it. You are compressing that plan into a one-page summary organized around who does what and when. FULL CARE PLAN TEXT Patient requires assistance with medication administration twice daily (morning and evening), physical therapy exercises 3x weekly per attached sheet, low-sodium diet per dietitian consult, weekly weight checks to monitor fluid retention, and monthly follow-up with cardiology. WHO'S INVOLVED IN CARE Daughter lives nearby and handles daily visits; son lives out of state but manages finances and calls weekly; home health aide comes weekday mornings. WHAT THE FAMILY KEEPS ASKING ABOUT Whose job is it to actually track the weekly weight checks, and does the home health aide handle the PT exercises or does someone else need to? RULES Pull every actionable item from the plan — medications, therapies, appointments, dietary instructions, monitoring tasks — and assign each one to whichever listed family member's role it matches, based only on what the plan and the stated roles actually say; if it's unclear who's responsible for something, list it under "unassigned — needs a family decision" rather than guessing. Keep every clinical instruction's actual content unchanged — compress the surrounding language, not the substance of the instruction itself. Where the recurring family questions are directly answered somewhere in the plan, surface that answer explicitly near the top so it stops being re-asked; where a recurring question isn't answered anywhere in the plan, say so plainly instead of inferring an answer the plan doesn't actually give. WHAT NOT TO DO Do not shorten a specific instruction (a dose, a frequency, a restriction) in a way that changes what it requires. Do not answer a family question with anything beyond what the plan itself states, even if the answer seems like reasonable common sense. OUTPUT FORMAT 1. One-page summary organized by family member/role, listing exactly what each person is responsible for and when. 2. Answers to the recurring questions, sourced directly from the plan, or flagged as not addressed in the plan. 3. Unassigned items needing a family decision. 4. A closing line stating that the full care plan remains the authoritative document, this is a coordination aid built from it, and any change to the plan itself needs to go through the care team that authored it.
Customize
Optional — swap in your own details for the highlighted parts above.
Why this works
The rule against inferring who's responsible for an unassigned task addresses the most common real-world breakdown in family caregiving — a task with no clearly designated owner tends to get either duplicated or dropped entirely, and a model asked to organize a care plan by role will otherwise make a plausible-sounding assumption about who probably handles it, which papers over the actual coordination gap instead of surfacing it for the family to resolve deliberately. Compressing the language around an instruction while leaving its substance untouched matters for the same reason it matters in discharge instructions: "weekly weight checks to monitor fluid retention" compressed into "keep an eye on weight" quietly drops both the frequency and the clinical reason for the task, and a family member skimming a shortened summary has no way to recover what was lost unless the instruction's actual content was preserved exactly. Answering recurring family questions only when the plan itself actually answers them — and saying so plainly when it doesn't — prevents the summary from becoming a second, informal source of truth that quietly diverges from the plan the care team actually wrote; if the model filled an unanswered question with a reasonable-sounding guess, that guess could get treated as settled by a family member who never goes back to the original document. The closing line reasserting the full plan's authority exists because a one-page summary is deliberately lossy by design — it's meant to make the plan usable day to day, not to replace it as the record the care team should be consulted against when something changes.
What you get back
Daughter (daily visits): morning and evening medication administration; weekly weight checks (currently unassigned in the plan — needs a family decision on who tracks this). Son (remote): monthly cardiology follow-up scheduling and confirming attendance. Home health aide (weekday mornings): assistance with medication per the plan; PT exercises not explicitly assigned to the aide in the plan — needs confirmation from the PT team. Recurring questions: Weekly weight tracking — not assigned to anyone in the plan as written; PT exercise responsibility — not addressed in the plan. The full care plan remains the authoritative document — any change should go through the care team that authored it.
Verified against
ChatGPT GPT-5.1 · 2026-08-13
Changelog
- 2026-08-13 — Initial publish, verified against ChatGPT GPT-5.1.
Need this built into your business?
If a prompt isn't enough — what Scult builds, built and maintained for you — that's Scult's day job.
EXPLORE WHAT SCULT BUILDS
