EVAL Foundation For patients Updated April 24, 2026

Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM)

Assesses functional limitations and disability related to foot and ankle conditions in daily activities and sports.

Add to Library

Activities of Daily Living Scale

  • Please rate your level of difficulty with each of the following activities over the past week due to your foot and ankle condition.

0%

Reference

Summary

Originally published in 2005 in Foot and Ankle International, the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) was developed to assess the physical function of individuals with musculoskeletal disorders of the leg, foot, and ankle. The FAAM is a 29-item self-report instrument that evaluates functional limitations in patients with foot and ankle pathology.

Scoring Components

The FAAM comprises two subscales:

  1. Activities of Daily Living (21 items): points awarded based on choices. Selecting a choice of n/a excludes question from calculation. Result includes total points and a 0-100% rating

  2. Sports (7 items): Selecting a choice of n/a excludes question from calculation. Results include total points and a 0-100% rating

Note: Each item is scored on a 5-point scale (0-4), with higher scores indicating better function. The FAAM ADL and Sports subscale scores are calculated as percentages, with 100% representing no functional limitation and 0% representing complete inability.

The instrument also includes global function ratings for each domain.

  1. ADL Global Function Rating: 0-100%

  2. Sports Global Function Rating: 0-100%

The instrument also includes a rating of current level of function.

  1. Rate of current level of function: Normal, Nearly Normal, Abnormal, Severely abnormal

Calculations

A) Activities  of  Daily  Living  Scale

  • Number  of  Completed  Responses  (‘n’); (max  =  21)

  • Activities  of  Daily  Living  Score  =  (sum of n responses/ n x 4) ×100

B) Sports  Scale

  • Number  of  Completed  Responses  (‘n’); (max  =  7)

  • Sports  Score  =   (sum of n responses/ n x 4) x 100

The FAAM has strong psychometric properties, including reliability and validity, and is widely used in clinical practice and research to monitor patient progress, establish baselines, and assess treatment outcomes in foot and ankle rehabilitation.

Score Developer: Dr. Jesse Van Swearingen is an associate professor in the Department of Physical Therapy at the University of Pittsburgh School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences and chairs the research committee for the American Physical Therapy Association Academy of Geriatrics.

Original Literature:

  • Martin, RobRoy L., et al. “Evidence of validity for the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM).” Foot & Ankle International 26.11 (2005): 968-983.

Additional Literature:

  • Martin, Robroy L., and James J. Irrgang. “A survey of self-reported outcome instruments for the foot and ankle.” Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy 37.2 (2007): 72-84.

  • Cosby, Nicole L., and Jay Hertel. “Clinical assessment of ankle injury outcomes: case scenario using the foot and ankle ability measure.” Journal of sport rehabilitation 20.1 (2011): 89-99.

Instructions

  • Rate your level of difficulty with each activity over the past week due to your foot and ankle condition.

  • For each item, select the response that best describes your current ability, ranging from 'No Difficulty At All' to 'Unable to do.' Mark 'N/A' if an activity does not apply to you.

  • At the end of each section, provide an overall function rating from 0-100, where 100 represents your function before the foot and ankle problem and 0 represents inability to perform any usual activities.

Citation

Score Developer: Dr. Jesse Van Swearingen is an associate professor in the Department of Physical Therapy at the University of Pittsburgh School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences and chairs the research committee for the American Physical Therapy Association Academy of Geriatrics.

Martin, RobRoy L., et al. “Evidence of validity for the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM).” Foot & Ankle International 26.11 (2005): 968-983.