Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology

2011 Edition
| Editors: Jeffrey S. Kreutzer, John DeLuca, Bruce Caplan

American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Functional Assessment of Communication Skills for Adults

  • Carole Roth
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79948-3_854

Synonyms

Description

The ASHA-FACS was designed as a quick and easily administered measure of functional communication behaviors at the level of disability, based on direct observations by speech-language pathologists or significant others who are familiar with the client’s typical communication performance across the following domains: Social Communication; Communication of Basic Needs; Reading, Writing, and Number Concepts; and Daily Planning. Within each domain, specific functional behaviors are rated on a 7-point scale of independence, ranging from “does” the activity fully independently, through five levels of “does with” varying degrees of assistance to “does not” perform the activity. For example, Social Communication concerns the ability to use names of familiar people, exchange information on the telephone, answer yes/no question and follow directions, understand facial expressions and tone of voice, comprehend nonliteral meaning, and understand TV and radio...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References and Readings

  1. Adamovich, B., & Henderson, J. (1992). Scales of cognitive ability for traumatic brain injury. Chicago: Riverside.Google Scholar
  2. Davidson, B., & Worrall, L. (2002). The assessment of activity limitation in functional communication: Challenges and choices. In A. E. Hillis (Ed.), The handbook of adult language disorders: Integrating cognitive neuropsychology, neurology, and rehabilitation (pp. 19–34). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  3. Davidson, B., Worrall, L., & Hickson, L. (2003). Identifying the communication activities of older people with aphasia: Evidence from naturalistic observation. Aphasiology, 17(3), 243–264.Google Scholar
  4. Donovan, N. J., Rosenbek, J. C., Ketterson, T. U., & Velozo, C. A. (2006). Adding meaning to measurement: Initial Rasch analysis of the ASHA FACS Social Communication Subtest. Aphasiology, 20(2–4), 362–373.Google Scholar
  5. Frattali, C. M. (Ed.) (1998). Measuring modality-specific behaviors, functional abilities, and quality of life. In  Measuring outcomes in speech-language pathology. (P. 203). New York: Thieme.Google Scholar
  6. Frattali, C. M., Thompson, C. K., Holland, A. L., Wohl, C. B., & Ferketic, M. M. (1995). The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Functional Assessment of Communication Skills for Adults (ASHA FACS). Rockville, MD: ASHA.Google Scholar
  7. Frattali, C. M., Thompson, C. M., Holland, A. L., Wohl, C. B., & Ferketic, M. M. (1995). The FACS of life ASHA FACS—a functional outcome measure for adults. ASHA, 37(4), 40–46.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Hagen, C., Malkmus, D., & Durham, P. (1979). Levels of cognitive functioning. In Rehabilitation of the head-injured adult: Comprehensive physical management (Appendix C., pp. 87–89). Downey, CA: Professional Staff Association of Rancho Los Amigos Hospital.Google Scholar
  9. Kagan, A., Simmons-Mackie, N., Rowland, A., Huijbregts, M., Shumway, E., McEwen, S., Threats, T., & Sharp, S. (2008). Counting what counts: A framework for capturing real-life outcomes of aphasia intervention. Aphasiology, 22(3), 258–280.Google Scholar
  10. Kertesz, A. (1982). Western Aphasia Battery. New York: Grune & Stratton.Google Scholar
  11. Lomas, J., Pickard, L., Bester, S., Elbard, H., Finlayson, A., & Zoghaib, C. (1989). The Communicative Effectiveness Index: Development and psychometric evaluation of a functional communication measure for adults. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 54, 113–124.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Ross, K. B., & Wertz, R. T. (2002). Relationships between language-based disability and quality of life in chronically aphasic adults. Aphasiology, 16(8), 791–800.Google Scholar
  13. State University of New York at Buffalo Research Foundation. (1993). Guide for use of the Uniform Data Set for Medical Rehabilitation: Functional independence measure. Buffalo, NY: Author.Google Scholar
  14. Turkstra, L. S., Coelho, C., & Ylvisaker, M. (2005). The use of standardized tests for individuals with cognitive-communication disorders. Seminars in Speech and Language, 26(4), 215–222.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Worrall, L., & Yiu, E. (2000). Effectiveness of functional communication therapy by volunteers for people with aphasia following stroke. Aphasiology, 14(9), 911–924.Google Scholar
  16. Worrall, L., McCooey, R., Davidson, B., Larkins, B., & Hickson, L. (2002). The validity of functional assessments of communication and the activity/participation components of the ICIDH-2: Do they reflect what really happens in real-life? Journal of Communication Disorders, 35(2), 107–137.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carole Roth
    • 1
  1. 1.Otolaryngology Clinic, Speech DivisionNaval Medical CenterSan DiegoUSA