From what I understand, SSRD as a tool seems like it would be more for learning about something in the specific or a particular program(group) and for not making generalizations (as that is not the main goal). The key to SSRD is “having reliable and valid outcome measure that can be repeatedly assessed over a period of time” (www.infuquision.com). I would try an, A1B1A2B2. A 1 is my first baseline, in these case clients who have been dianogsised with clinical depression but haven’t begun taking medication as part of their protocol. The first intervention would be where the clients engage in a series of activities (therapy, organized exercise, art therapy, etc) for a predetermined number of sessions. B1 would be a measurement, via survey if the clients realized any manner of change in their being as a result of the prior intervention. Once recorded, this forms the basis of our second baseline, A2. The next intervention would be one where the client cease engaging in all prior interventions and only take medication (in this case all clients would need to take the same medication, dose administered at the same time of day and taken only as prescribed (with food, etc.). after a predetermined time period we would measure changes based on this intervention, B2. This evaluation should demonstrate the improvement/or not when the intervention is removed that would indicate that the change was not just “coincidental” but was due to the intervention (Royse, et. al, 2010, pg. 158). Ethical concerns arise whenever there may be breech in confidentiality. The client needs to provide informed consent (why is study being done, their part in the study and who will have access to the findings and ultimately how the findings will be used). Another concern is that multiple interventions may ultimately prove helpful for future researchers working in a similar arena, it may be a detrement to the client as they, though did participate of their own free will, many have seen long term benefits with earlier interventions.In SSRD the overarching goal isn’t to provide generalized knowledge for print worthy findings, it is for the practice of evaluation(NASW.org). Our text tells us there are three categories of GRD: pre-experimental, quasi-experimental and experimental research designs. The pre-experimental(PERD) is your starting point as they alone can’t “provide conclusive that the intervention alone was responsible for the changes”(Royse,et.al page 231). Quasi-experimental(QERD) designs “are better than PERD but not as good as ERD for providing hard evidence”( Royse,et.al page 231). Experimental design(ERD) is “the standard against which other designs are compared”( Royse,et.al page 234).