I can understand why this "report" left you with more questions than it answered. It leads me to many questions and a couple of suggestions.
1. What were the credentials of the evaluator?
2. Could this be just an initial summary of the findings with a report to follow?
3. Did you have any meeting to discuss these results? (beyond the ADHD-in/medication recommendation?)
I would start by attempting to get more information about the tests you have already taken, This "report" gives you very little information. At the very least, each subtest, index and composite score should be listed including the standard score or scaled score and percentile rank. The evaluator should provide some narrative about the approach you took to the tests and describe the implications. They should describe what each subtest/test measures and what your performance on the tests mean, For instance, what happened under time constraints vs untimed tests? (see the two math tests) Are there differences in varying aspects of memory and what does this mean? The evaluation should list all recommendations - and it seems there should be some beyond medication.
I am also concerned that the assistant administered the tests - I wonder how skilled and experienced he or she was? I would ask if the test protocols are available - these are the actual tests/recordings of your responses/scoring sheets.
Should you get a second opinion? If you cannot get more information from the evaluators, I am afraid that you should. But, you will have to get the names and version of each test given. The new evaluator cannot use the same version of the test within 12 months because your familiarity with the test would negate the results.
