Assessment Task 2 - Portfolio
Based on a review of evidence concerning effective communication strategies, develop intervention materials (e.g.: information leaflet, website, mobile app) for the client group you have chosen for Assessment Task 1 (3000 words portfolio). This portfolio is worth 50% of the overall module mark.
This portfolio should be composed of four parts, as follows:
· Part A - Introduction about the condition and client group of your choice (max 250 words) Remind the reader briefly of the condition and the specific client group you have chosen in Assessment Task 1. In the introduction, state clearly the aim of your assignment, just like for any other essay.

· Part B - Literature Review (max 1250 words) Literature review on theories and research findings concerning the types/strategies of communication you are using with your client group, reflecting on age-related, gender-related and cross-cultural specificities (e.g.: what has been shown to be effective, what hasn’t, why, how this has been shown). o Please justify your particular approach to community.
Please justify your particular approach to communicating with your client group, synthesizing the cited research findings on individual differences, lifespan in health and illness and justifying the formats you have chosen for communication with your client group.
· Part C - Materials (1000 words)
You don’t have to be, but you can be creative if you like with the materials you design- you can include website ideas (PrtScr snapshots or just Word doc version of website contents), mobile apps, leaflets, brochures, a video, etc. Creativity is not a requirement though for an excellent grade. These materials should clearly synthesize and reflect the research findings you have reviewed in Part B.
· Part D - Client appraisal (500 words)
Produce a client appraisal report evaluating one specific client “Participant X” as part of your intervention. Ask one participant to complete either the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS, Zigmond & Snaith, 1983) or the brief COPE (Carver, 1997) questionnaire. Score their responses and consider their relative position with respect to the available normative data from the general population available for each test. Clearly present your findings in a table to show Participant X’s performance with respect to the norm-referenced and sample-referenced data. Evaluate these findings to provide a coherent interpretation of X’s current level of depression and anxiety or their preferred means of coping. The report should end with a clear conclusion about the current psychological disposition of Participant X.
Sample Client Appraisal – what to include:
Client Information
Name:
Date of birth:
Date of assessment:
Purpose of assessment:
Assessments completed:
Notes:

Anxiety and Depression
Test description. The HADS is a 14-item scale with 7 items measuring anxiety and 7 items measuring depression, developed for use in general medical out-patient clinics but now widely used in clinical practice and research (Zigmond & Snaith, 1983). The reliability of both anxiety and depression subscales in the client group were acceptable.
Client profile. The client has an observed HADS-Anxiety score of 14 out of 21, which places them within the 98th percentile of males in the general population, and the 79th percentile of the client comparison group. When accounting for the margin of error within the testing process, their true anxiety score is likely to fall between 12 (94th percentile) and 16 (100th percentile). The client therefore appears to be experiencing elevated levels of anxiety. The client’s observed HADS-depression score was 4 out of 21 (68th Percentile of males in the general population). Their true test score, when allowing for testing error is likely to be between 2.7 (63rd percentile) and 5.3 (71st percentile). Their depression level is therefore above average when compared to the general population, but is low when compared to the client group where they score in the 17th percentile.
Conclusion. Given the client’s current high levels of stress and anxiety, relative to population norms and the with respect to the client group, they are recommended for entry into the support programme. The current depression level is above average relative to the general population, but low compared to that of the client group. However, this situation could deteriorate if the underlying stress and anxiety is not addressed.
Report Prepared By: Miss A. Brown (Test Administrator) 3rd November 2019
Coping Styles
Test description. The Brief COPE is a 28-item scale used to assess different ways in which people respond to stress including problem-focused and emotional coping methods, as well as maladaptive forms of coping. In this report, the four coping dimensions proposed by Baumstarck et al (2017) are used to assess the preferred coping styles of the client.
Client profile. Relative to the general population, the client shows typical levels of coping through social support where they scored 4.1 out of 5, placing them in the 64th percentile (margin of error, 48th to 79th percentile) and typical levels of coping through problem solving where they scored 4.3 out of 5, placing them in the 43rd percentile (with a margin of error between the 25th to 63rd percentile). These scores would place the client in the 97th percentile (for social support) and 99th percentile (for problem solving) of the comparison group for these adaptive (approach-focussed) coping methods.
The client also shows typical levels of coping through avoidance where they scored 2.9 out of 5, placing them in the 49th percentile of the client comparison group and the 49th percentile (margin of error, 26th to 72nd percentile) of the general population. The client’s responses suggest that they under-utilise coping mechanisms centred around positive thinking where their score of 3.0 out of 5 places them within the 8th percentile of the general population (margin of error, 3rd to 20th percentile) and the 56th percentile of the client group.
Conclusion. The client tends to utilise adaptive coping strategies (social support and problem solving) to a greater extent than the client group but relies less on positive thinking as a coping mechanism. No evidence of maladaptive (avoidant) coping was found above that seen in the typical population.