Portfolio part 3 Firstly, you are asked to undertake a literature review of multi-agency working concentrating on either vulnerable children or vulnerable adults. For this you will gather a number of articles and review these looking for any themes

CYP6032 – Leading Health & Social Care in a Multi-Agency Environment

Component 2

Assessment Pack contents:

Contents

Short introduction to the task. 1

Key terms. 2

Key Resources. 3

Template. 5

Rubric used to mark. 7

Video link that explains the task. 11

Short introduction to the task:

Assessment
Component form  (eg. Essay or Online test)	Magnitude  (eg. 2,000 words  or 2 hours)	Weighting  and/or  Pass/Fail	Assessment Deadline	Feedback Date	Objective(s) assessed  (eg. 1, 2)
Portfolio Parts 3 & 4	2,000 words	50%		15 days after submission	1,3

Portfolio

Portfolio part 3

Firstly, you are asked to undertake a literature review of multi-agency working concentrating on either vulnerable children or vulnerable adults. For this you will gather a number of articles and review these looking for any themes that occur in them or differences of opinion, you will conclude the work by drawing together the main points for leaders and managers to be aware of.

Portfolio part 4

This section is a learning evaluation, this will be in the form of a reflection, using a reflective model you will review the learning across the module and highlight your main learning and discuss this.

The word limit is 2,000 for this component you MAY wish to utilise 1,500 for the literature review and 500 for the reflection on learning. This are simply a guideline, and you may find you decide to use more or less for any given section.

Key terms:

Reflection	Evaluation
Reflexivity	Recommendations
Transactional	Vulnerable
Transformational	Intervention
Psychological	Assessment
Leadership	Safeguarding
Management	Proactivity
Theory	Collaboration
Justification	Communication
Thematic analysis	Leadership

Evidence pyramid:

Key Resources:

Essential Reading

Dacre-Pool, L. and Qualter, P. (2018) An introduction to emotional intelligence. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.

Dickinson, H. and Carey, G. (2016) Managing and leading in inter-agency settings. 2nd ed. Bristol: Policy Press.

Frost, N. and Robinson, M. (Eds) (2016) Developing multi-professional teamwork for integrated children’s services. 3rd ed. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Iszatt-White, M. and Saunders, C. (2020) Leadership. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Northhouse, PG. (2019) Leadership: theory and practice. 8th ed. Los Angeles: SAGE

Prosser, S. (2018) Effective people: leadership and organisation development in healthcare. Boca Raton: CRC Press

Journals

Healthcare Leadership Review

Journal of Healthcare Leadership

Journal of Leadership Studies

Leadership Excellence

Leadership in Health Services

Websites

www.kingsfund.org.uk/

www.cqc.org.uk/

www.gov.uk/

www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk

www.skillsforcare.org.uk/

www.open.ac.uk/

www.scie.org.uk/

Template

Portfolio part 3: GUIDE: 1,500 words

This will be a literature review of multi-agency work based on a selected group (either vulnerable children or adults).

You will be asked to select ONE ‘group’ that you want to base your literature on, this should be based on your experience or your interest area. The topic is multi-agency working, so you will need to do a literature search of the databases looking for the most recent articles you can find on the subject.

You will then present the most relevant ones, the aim being to allow the reader to understand the subject matter and the papers you have chosen. The piece of work should be split into the following sections:

Introduction – Here you will say what this section of the portfolio aims to do. It should state the type of research that you are doing (a literature review) and the aims of it. You will need statistics to support this and these should support your choice – you will need to justify WHY you have chosen this are to research. 150 words (guide)

Literature Review – You may find you want to split your review into themes. You will have received lessons on thematic analysis, and you should also perform research as to the methods on how to do this. You are not required to write a methodology.

There does need to be a purpose to your literature review, so you may want to think that you are arguing a case for multi-agency working, or you may prefer to look at the issues with multi-agency working; this will help you concentrate your literature to be more manageable.

When you conduct your search, you should choose between 3-7 articles, and consider the six steps as detailed in the evidence. Please make sure that you help the reader understand the reliability of the article/information you are citing, as well as helping them understand the main points of the literature. You may wish to do this in a table and include in the appendix? Please use the articles on Moodle to support the six-stage process and guide you. 1000 words (guide)

Conclusion – Here you should draw your conclusion what have you found out and what can you recommend?

Portfolio part 4: GUIDE: 500 words

Learning Evaluation

This should be a reflection on your learning throughout this module and your own development of leadership and team working skills.

Please use either Gibbs (1998) or Rolfe et al (2001) as a template.

Your work should consider the impact that these lessons have had on your learning and on how you act (or may act) in different scenarios. You may have developed your communication skills or enhanced your awareness of collaboration. The piece may also detail where you need to improve for the future, you may wish to set out a plan on how you will do this, this can be included in the appendix if you wish.

Rubric used to mark:

Classification: *Criterion:*	Exceptional 1^st 100, 95	Outstanding 1^st 85	1^st 75	2.1 68, 65, 62	2.2 58, 55, 52	3 48, 45, 42	Fail 38, 35, 32	Abject Fail 25, 20, 10, 0
*Knowledge and Understanding*	Polished grasp of subject. Astute and authoritative approach to complexity.	Comprehensive and confident grasp with strong sense of subject complexity.	Thorough understanding evident and well applied to specific assessment task.	Secure, general understanding and reasonable application to assessment task.	Sound knowledge relevant to the assessment task.	Limited knowledge shows basic understanding. Some awareness of the context of the assessment task.	Faulty understanding of assessment task or concepts. Irrelevant or mostly absent content.	No understanding of assessment task or concepts. Irrelevant or absent content.
*Structure and Argument*	Effective and integrated over-arching argument or structure, clear, insightful synthesis. Highly creative understanding of topic.	Effective overall argument with clear and insightful connections between claims. Creative understanding of topic.	Clear and logical focus and direction with valuable connections made between claims. Good level of creativity.	Well-focused on the question with some clear connections made between claims and some overall direction. Some creativity.	Addresses the topic with some direction and makes some connections between claims or different parts of artefact/assignment.	Argument is weak and difficult to detect. Connections made between statements limited	Lack of argument. Faulty connection between statements.	No argument. Many faulty connections between statements.
*Analysis and Conclusions*	Original and searching analysis, critical appraisal of task and judicious conclusions.	Searching analysis with pertinent conclusions drawn.	Insightful analysis throughout with appropriate conclusions drawn.	Strong analysis of salient illustrative examples. Some general conclusions drawn.	Some conclusions drawn based on some reasonable comparisons and examples.	Basic analysis. Remains descriptive, little evaluation or comparison. Few clear conclusions.	Insufficient evaluation or attempt to make comparisons. Conclusions illogical insufficient.	No evaluation or attempt to make comparisons. Conclusions illogical or absent.
*Sources & Evidence*	Extensive and evaluative use of evidential support for argument.	Extensive use of evidence with some evaluation.	Clear support of argument with well selected evidence.	Draws on relevant independent sources and evidence to support claims.	Makes simple use of evidence from recommended sources.	Relies on superficial statements with little supporting evidence.	Lack of evidence or relevant sources.	No evidence or relevant sources.
*Adherence to Referencing Conventions, Technical Skills*	Flawless referencing or technical skills.	Flawless referencing or technical skills.	Excellent referencing or technical skills.	Consistent and accurate referencing or technical skills.	Largely consistent accurate referencing or technical skills.	Limited referencing/ adherence to convention or technical skills.	Inadequate referencing or technical skills.	Inadequate or no referencing or technical skills.
*Written/Visual/ Oral* *Style & Clarity*	Professional and sophisticated with exceptional clarity and coherence. Excellent, controlled, confident delivery, pace, and audience engagement.	Professional and fluent with great clarity and coherence. Confident delivery, pace and audience engagement.	Fluent and accurate with great clarity and coherence. Mostly confident delivery, pace and audience engagement.	Clear and coherent. Good delivery, pace and audience engagement	Some lapses of clarity. Some expression is ineffective. Satisfactory delivery, pace and audience engagement	Adequate, but awkward expression throughout with little clarity. Poor delivery, pace and audience engagement	Inadequate and unclear presentation. Impaired communication. Error-strewn.	Grossly inadequate and unclear presentation. Severely impaired communication. Error-strewn.

85-100%

Knowledge and Understanding

Exceptional comprehension of the implications of the question and critical understanding of the theoretical and methodological issues for this level
Technical vocabulary, where appropriate: accurate and exceptionally sophisticated usage.

Argument

A critical, analytical and sophisticated argument that is logically structured and well-supported
Evidence of independent thought and ability to ‘see beyond the question’
Evidence of reading widely beyond the prescribed reading list and creative use of evidence to enhance the overall argument; demonstrates the ability to synthesise appropriate principles by reference, where appropriate, to primary sources and knowledge at the forefront of the discipline

Presentation

Extremely well presented: no grammatical or spelling errors; written in a fluent and engaging style; exemplary referencing and bibliographic formatting.

75%

Thank you for submitting this piece of work, your knowledge is clear and application has begun to shine in places. This is not just apparent in the topics but, also in the literature review.

Knowledge and Understanding

Excellent knowledge seen in areas and a clear understanding of the subject. You have shown direct understanding of theoretical however I would have liked to have seen deeper methodological issues highlighted.

Your technical vocabulary, where appropriate is at times accurate and sophisticated usage however this is not on all occasions. Please consider referring yourself to academic skills and participate in all formative activities to continue to improve in this area.

You demonstrate a coherent argument that is logically structured and supported by evidence. This evidence is of good quality and shows good researching skills.

Your work demonstrates a capacity for intellectual initiative and independent thought. You have an ability to engage with the material critically and successfully.

You show a use of appropriate material from a range of sources extending beyond the reading list – well done!

Some high-quality organisation and style of presentation (including referencing); some grammatical or spelling errors evidenced however this is also written in a fluent and engaging style.

62, 65, 68%

Knowledge and Understanding

Very good knowledge and understanding of the subject and displays awareness of underlying theoretical and methodological issues
Technical vocabulary, where appropriate: attempts use, but occasionally without full understanding or success

Argument

A generally critical, analytical argument that is reasonably well structured and well-supported
Some critical capacity to see the implications of the question, though not able to ‘see beyond the question’ enough to develop an independent approach
Some critical knowledge of relevant literature; use of works beyond the prescribed reading list; demonstrating some ability to be selective in the range of material used and to synthesise rather than describe

Presentation

Well presented: no significant grammatical or spelling errors; written clearly and concisely; largely consistent referencing and bibliographic formatting.

52, 55, 58%

Knowledge and Understanding

Good comprehension of the subject, though there may be some errors and/or gaps, and some awareness of underlying theoretical/methodological issues with little understanding of how they relate to the question
Technical vocabulary, where appropriate: limited, perhaps attempted, but not always successful usage

Argument

Capacity for argument is limited with a tendency to assert/state opinion rather than argue on the basis of reason and evidence; structure may not be evident
Tendency to be descriptive rather than critical, but some attempt at analysis
Some attempt to go beyond or criticise the ‘essential reading’ for the unit; displaying limited capacity to discern between relevant and non-relevant material

Presentation

Adequately presented: writing style conveys meaning but is sometimes awkward; some significant grammatical and spelling errors; inconsistent referencing but generally accurate bibliography.

42, 45, 48%

Knowledge and Understanding

Limited and/or basic knowledge and understanding with significant errors and omissions and generally ignorant or confused awareness of key theoretical/ methodological issues
Technical vocabulary, where appropriate: little and/or inaccurate usage

Argument

Largely misses the point of the question, asserts rather than argues a case; underdeveloped or chaotic structure; evidence mentioned but used inappropriately or incorrectly
Very little attempt at analysis or synthesis, tending towards excessive description.
Limited, uncritical, and generally confused account of a narrow range of sources

Presentation

Satisfactorily presented: but not always easy to follow; frequent grammatical and spelling errors; limited attempt at providing references (e.g., only referencing direct quotations) and containing bibliographic omissions.

32, 35, 38%

Knowledge and Understanding

Shows very limited understanding and knowledge of the subject and/or misses the point of the question
Technical vocabulary, where appropriate: no usage, or misunderstood

Argument

Incoherent or illogical structure; evidence used inappropriately or incorrectly.
Unsatisfactory analytical skills
Limited, uncritical, and generally confused account of a very narrow range of sources.

Presentation

Unsatisfactory presentation e.g., not always easy to follow; frequent grammatical and spelling errors and limited or no attempt at providing references and containing bibliographic omissions.

0, 10, 20, 25%

Knowledge and Understanding

Shows little or no knowledge and understanding of the subject, no awareness of key theoretical/ methodological issues and/or fails to address the question
Technical vocabulary, where appropriate: no usage, or fundamentally misunderstood

Argument

Unsuccessful or no attempt to construct an argument and an incoherent or illogical structure; evidence used inappropriately or incorrectly
Very poor analytical skills
Limited, uncritical, and generally confused account of a very narrow range of sources

Presentation

Very poor quality of presentation and limited or no attempt at providing references and containing bibliographic omissions.

Portfolio part 3 Firstly, you are asked to undertake a literature review of multi-agency working concentrating on either vulnerable children or vulnerable adults. For this you will gather a number of articles and review these looking for any themes

CYP6032 – Leading Health & Social Care in a Multi-Agency Environment

Component 2

Assessment Pack contents:

Portfolio

Portfolio part 3

Portfolio part 4

Evidence pyramid:

Key Resources:

Essential Reading

Further Reading

Journals

Websites

Template

Portfolio part 3: GUIDE: 1,500 words

Portfolio part 4: GUIDE: 500 words

Expert Help With This Assignment — On Your Terms

Need help with your own assignment?

You May Also Find Helpful

Clinical Case Scenario/Enigma for Summative Assessment Presentation. Clinical Enigma Patient Profile Name: Jim Age 42, Diagnosis Psychosis, 6ft 3inches tall, weight 14 stone. Has been a patient in a 10 bed inpatient rehabilitation unit for adults

Identify all priorities of care – Person-Centred Care. This can be structured under headings (such as physical, psychological, cultural, discharge planning, multi-disciplinary team involvement, medication issues, health promotion

SBIRT overview – Describe the history of SBIRT, the SBIRT process and how it is used in clinical practice settings using US research articles. • Slide 3: Case Presentation – Do not include patient identifying information but include

Task Examine the role of leadership in the development of a service improvement programme within a defined area of practice. Students will select an appropriate quality improvement approach.

Need Help With This Assignment?