Major caveats first (in addition to the obvious caveat that we don't have access to rich clinical observational or historical data):
1. He was young at time of testing, which has all sorts of implications for instability in test scores.
2. He was tested with untreated ADHD and anxiety, both of which tend to lower working memory and processing speed performance in particular, but can affect pretty much any test score.
That being said, I find notable:
1. Index score diversity: PRI, in the Superior range, is a fair bit higher than any of the others, which are all in the Average range.
2. Scaled score diversity: PRI has a 2.3 SD range, with the lowest score in the timed/motor/spatial task, and the highest score in the untimed/motor-free/fluid reasoning task. Less significant, but still of interest, PSI has a related split, with the motor-reduced task 1 SD above the motor-involved task.
1 & 2 taken together suggest to me that it is possible there is some kind of nonverbal giftedness in play, probably in combination with a language-based relative weakness, and perhaps motor coordination. Hence Dx of dysgraphia.
Moving on.
3. Generally strong academic performance: On the plus side, at age 6, appeared to be performing academically at a level consistent with the highest estimate of his cognitive ability, with exceptions (Average and High Average) in spelling, writing fluency, and math fluency, which are exactly the areas predicted by dysgraphia. Kudos to your evaluator. On the minus side, there were no measures that would identify deficits in phonetic decoding (dyslexia), only reading tasks that are amenable to whole-word reading as a compensatory strategy--well within the range for a bright child in a rich literacy environment, even one outside the GT range. (Keep in mind the word-level reading expected of children at the end of kindergarten pretty much consists of 50-150 Dolch sight words, and a few very simple decodables, like CVC words.)
If word-level reading deficits are in play, either in naked decoding, or in decoding fluency, these data are insufficient to rule them in or out. In my experience, it is not unusual for bright children with reading difficulties to start struggling during third or fourth grade, as their peers acquire fluency, and start obtaining an increasing percentage of their high-level language exposure from text, while the struggling readers are restricted to oral language.
As parents of a student on a 504 plan, you generally have a right to request a re-evaluation every two years (schools not uncommonly offer re-evaluations every three years), just like for IEPs. If you, he, and the school are all happy with his academic and global progress, then there is no particular urgency to re-evaluate him; good reasons might include access to additional supports, services, or resources (either for remediation or advancement).
If, at some point, you do choose to re-evaluate, another item that may have relevance for your child in particular is the revision of the WISC-V to a 5 factor structure, that separates the visual spatial tasks (e.g., block design, his lowest PRI score) from the fluid reasoning tasks (e.g., matrix reasoning, his highest score), potentially allowing the FRI (Fluid Reasoning Index) to rise above 130, into the formal GT range.
