| Course | ADC 665 Advanced Addiction Theories |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 6 |
| Paper type | Case management plan |
| Length | About 1,056 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | Psychology and Addiction Studies |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for ADC 665 Module 6
Beyond the Referral Slip: Strengths-Based Case Management for Kim
Student Name
Psychology and Addiction Studies Program, Aspen University
ADC 665: Advanced Addiction Theories
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Beyond the Referral Slip: Strengths-Based Case Management for Kim
Kim, whose techniques were chosen in an earlier module, is eight weeks into treatment at Renee's Baton Rouge program. Most of her urine tests have been negative, and she has earned a dozen prize draws. But her life outside treatment has not moved. She has no job, no health insurance and no car, and depends on her mother for rides. Her mother has started to say that Kim is "just sitting around." Kim and the program are composites, invented for teaching. This paper sets out a case management plan for her.
Needs Beyond Treatment
A brief review of Kim's situation identified six needs: employment, health insurance, dental care for teeth damaged during her years of use, transportation, a hepatitis C test she had been putting off and some relief for the tension at home. Several were linked; without transportation, a job would be hard to keep, and without insurance, dental and medical care would be out of reach. Treatment alone would not address any of them, yet each could undermine her recovery.
Models of Case Management
Vanderplasschen et al. (2007) compared four models used with people with substance use problems. In brokerage, the case manager assesses needs and refers the client, with little further contact. Generalist case management adds monitoring and some advocacy. Strengths-based case management focuses on the client's own strengths and goals and involves active help in reaching resources. Intensive case management and assertive community treatment involve small caseloads and frequent contact, often in the community. The review found more consistent benefits for strengths-based and intensive models, including better retention in treatment and more use of services, while brokerage showed weak effects.
What the Evidence Shows
Hesse et al. (2007) pooled the randomized trials that had tested case management with this population. Case management reliably improved linkage to other community services, such as health care and housing. Effects on drug and alcohol use were weaker and varied between trials, leading the reviewers to conclude that case management should be understood mainly as a way of helping clients reach the services they need, not as a stand-alone treatment for substance use.
Siegal et al. (1996) tested strengths-based case management as an addition to substance abuse treatment. Clients who received it alongside treatment reported better employment outcomes than those who received treatment alone, which suggests the model can help with exactly the kind of practical gap Kim faces.
| Need | Service and contact | Who follows up | By when |
|---|---|---|---|
| Health insurance | Medicaid enrollment, parish benefits office | Renee confirms application submitted | Two weeks |
| Hepatitis C test | Community health clinic | Kim brings result to session | Four weeks |
| Dental care | Clinic dental program after insurance | Renee checks appointment made | Six weeks after insurance |
| Transportation | Bus pass program; route planning | Kim reports first week of use | One week |
| Employment | State workforce center; restaurant contacts | Renee checks first appointment kept | Three weeks |
| Family tension | Two family sessions with her mother | Family counselor | Within a month |
Why Strengths-Based
Kim had skills that the problem list did not show. She had worked in restaurants for five years, been promoted to shift lead and trained new staff. She was good with people and organized under pressure. A strengths-based approach began there: rather than a general job referral, Renee helped Kim contact two former managers and identify restaurants near bus routes. Siegal et al. (1996) found this kind of active, strengths-focused support improved employment, and Kim's own experience gave the approach something to work with.
Coordination and Consent
Kim signed specific consent forms for each provider who needed information, naming what would be shared. Substance use treatment records have strong federal confidentiality protections, so the workforce center was told only that Kim was in a program supporting her return to work, not about her substance use. Renee kept a single linkage record and reviewed it with Kim each month.
Measuring Success
Success will be judged by the linkages completed by their dates and by Kim's progress on goals she set herself: a job within three months and paying her mother a small rent. Hesse et al. (2007) found linkage outcomes are where case management shows its clearest effects, so these are the primary measures. Kim's substance use will continue to be tracked through treatment.
Barriers to Each Linkage
Each linkage carried its own barrier. The benefits office required documents Kim did not have, so Renee helped her request a copy of her birth certificate before the appointment. The health clinic had a waiting list, so Kim was placed on its cancellation list. The workforce center required an online profile, which Kim completed during a session on the program's computer. Transportation affected everything, so the bus pass came first in the sequence, with Renee helping Kim plan her routes to each appointment. Vanderplasschen et al. (2007) noted that models with active help in reaching services showed more consistent effects than brokerage, and these small practical steps are what active help means.
The First Monthly Review
At the first monthly review, four of six linkages were on track. Kim's Medicaid application was submitted, her bus pass was in use, her hepatitis C test was done and negative and the first family session had taken place. The employment linkage had stalled: Kim missed her workforce center appointment because she felt embarrassed about the gap in her work history. Rather than marking it as missed, Renee and Kim practiced how she would explain the gap, and Renee called the center to reschedule. Dental care was waiting on insurance. The review turned a missed appointment into a solvable problem.
The Mother's Role
Kim's mother was not only a source of tension but also a resource: she had been driving Kim to appointments and wanted her to succeed. The family sessions gave her a clear picture of the plan and a role in it, such as checking in about job applications rather than about whether Kim was "sitting around." As Kim's linkages progressed, the tension at home eased.
Conclusion
Vanderplasschen and colleagues found strengths-based and intensive case management more consistently beneficial than brokerage, Hesse and colleagues found case management improves linkage to services and Siegal and colleagues linked strengths-based case management to better employment. For Kim, a strengths-based plan names who follows up on each of six linkages and builds on her restaurant experience.
References
Hesse, M., Vanderplasschen, W., Rapp, R. C., Broekaert, E., & Fridell, M. (2007). Case management for persons with substance use disorders. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (4), Article CD006265. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006265.pub2
Siegal, H. A., Fisher, J. H., Rapp, R. C., Kelliher, C. W., Wagner, J. H., & O'Brien, W. F. (1996). Enhancing substance abuse treatment with case management: Its impact on employment. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 13(2), 93-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/0740-5472(96)00029-3
Vanderplasschen, W., Wolf, J., Rapp, R. C., & Broekaert, E. (2007). Effectiveness of different models of case management for substance-abusing populations. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 39(1), 81-95. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2007.10399867
What the ADC 665 Module 6 instructions ask for
The sixth module of ADC 665 usually asks for a case management plan. Use the Module 6 instructions in your Aspen course to confirm the format; the client is invented. Identify the client's needs beyond substance use treatment. Compare case management models and report evidence for them. Choose a model and justify it. Set out each linkage: the service, the contact person, who follows up and by what date. Address coordination among providers and the client's consent to share information. Say how success will be judged. Cite in APA 7, and never list a referral without saying who will check that the client actually got there. Plan what happens when a linkage fails, since some will.
How the ADC 665 Module 6 example is put together
Kim, the composite client from an earlier module, is eight weeks into treatment with mostly negative tests but no job, insurance or transportation. Vanderplasschen and colleagues compare brokerage, generalist, strengths-based and intensive models of case management. Hesse and colleagues' systematic review finds case management improves linkage to other services, with weaker evidence for reducing substance use. Siegal and colleagues report better employment outcomes for clients receiving strengths-based case management. A six-row linkage table names each service, contact, follow-up person and date, and a coordination section covers consent and a monthly review with Kim. A closing section describes what happened at the first monthly review.
Where the marks sit in the ADC 665 Module 6 rubric
A strong case management plan treats each linkage as a task with an owner and a date. This example compares models with evidence, choosing strengths-based case management because it fits Kim's situation and has support for employment outcomes. The evidence is reported carefully: case management improves linkage more reliably than drug use. The linkage table names the follow-up person for every service, which answers the most common weakness in such plans. Consent for information sharing is addressed explicitly. Success is judged by linkages completed and by Kim's progress toward goals she set. The first monthly review shows the plan in use, including a linkage that stalled and what was done about it, which is the kind of detail that shows a reader how follow-up works in practice.
ADC 665 Module 6 help: mistakes that cost marks
Case management plans often list referrals without follow-up, which leaves clients to navigate complex systems alone. For each linkage, name the contact, who follows up and when. Compare models with evidence; brokerage alone has weaker support. Start from the client's strengths and goals rather than only deficits. Report the evidence accurately, since case management helps clients reach services more reliably than it reduces use directly. Address consent before sharing information. Include transportation and other practical barriers, which often decide whether a linkage succeeds. Show what you will do when a linkage stalls, since some always do; a plan that assumes every referral succeeds will not survive its first month.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Aspen University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More ADC 665 and Psychology and Addiction Studies sample papers
- ADC 665 Module 1: Theories and Evidence in Addiction Counseling
- ADC 665 Module 2: Counselor Attitudes and the Alliance
- ADC 665 Module 3: Evidence-Based Techniques
- ADC 665 Module 4: Individualizing Treatment
- ADC 665 Module 5: Treatment Planning
- ADC 665 Module 7: Ethics in Addiction Practice
- ADC 665 Module 8: Integrating Knowledge, Skills and Attitudes
- SBS 200 Module 5: Emerging and Early Adulthood
- PAC 110 Module 6: Theories of Change and Motivation
- PAC 120 Module 3: Attending, Observing and Questioning
- PAC 411 Module 2: Generalist Practice and Fields of Practice
ADC 665 Module 6 questions, answered
What does ADC 665 Module 6 usually ask for?
Aspen's ADC 665 covers case management in this module, so a plan linking a client to services with named follow-up responsibilities is typical. Check your Module 6 prompt.
What is strengths-based case management?
A model in which the case manager helps clients identify their own strengths and goals and actively supports them in reaching resources, rather than only referring.
Does case management improve addiction outcomes?
Hesse and colleagues found case management reliably improves linkage to services; its direct effect on substance use was less consistent.
Where can I find a free ADC 665 Module 6 sample paper?
This page holds the full paper: needs beyond treatment, models compared with evidence and a linkage table naming who follows up and when.
What is the difference between brokerage and intensive case management?
Brokerage mainly refers clients to services; intensive models involve frequent contact, small caseloads and active help in reaching services.