Which of the following is a recommended practice when reporting assessment findings?

• A. Include raw scores only.
• B. Present only conclusions with no data.
• C. Provide no actionable recommendations.
• D. Provide integrated interpretation linking data, diagnosis, risk, and treatment recommendations.

Answer: (D)

When reporting assessment findings, the aim is to weave the data into a coherent interpretation that shows how the results relate to the client’s presentation, inform diagnostic considerations, indicate risk, and point to concrete treatment steps. This integrated interpretation gives the reader a clear throughline from what the numbers show to how that translates into care.

Raw scores by themselves lack context. They need to be framed with meaningful meaning—how they compare to norms, what they imply about functioning, and what measurement limitations might affect confidence in the results. Conclusions without the data don’t reveal how the conclusions were reached, making the reasoning hard to evaluate. And guidance without actionable recommendations leaves clinicians and clients without a clear plan for next steps.

So the strongest approach ties data to the clinical picture, explains how the results support (or raise questions about) a diagnosis, notes any identified risk and what that means for safety or monitoring, and then offers specific, actionable treatment recommendations—such as therapeutic approaches, frequency of sessions, referrals, and concrete goals. This integrated, practical approach makes the report useful for planning care, coordinating with others, and guiding follow-up.