Private Organization Accreditation

Sweetser, a Maine non-profit agency operating since 1828, provides comprehensive mental and behavioral health and substance abuse treatment services. Statewide, it serves around 15,000 consumers a year, including children, adults, and families in outpatient, office-based, and residential settings.


Ulysses Arteaga, L.C.S.W.

Volunteer Roles: Commissioner; EPPA; Marine Reviewer; Military Reviewer; Peer Reviewer; Team Leader

The Consuelo Foundation 2012 Peer Reviewer of the Year, Mr. Arteaga conducts two to three site visits a year, often volunteering for visits that require a Spanish speaking peer.
read more>>


Individuals and families who receive Disaster Recovery Case Management Services access and use resources and support that build on their strengths and meet their service needs.

DRCM 6: Service Monitoring and Reassessment

Service monitoring ensures continuity of service and care, and timely adjustments to service provision when the individual’s or family’s needs and circumstances change.

Rating Indicators
All elements or requirements outlined in the standard are evident in practice, as indicated by full implementation of the practices outlined in the Practice standards.
Practices are basically sound but there is room for improvement, as noted in the ratings for the Practice standards; e.g., 
  • Minor inconsistencies and not yet fully developed practices are noted, however, these do not significantly impact service quality; or
  • Procedures need strengthening; or
  • With few exceptions procedures are understood by staff and are being used; or
  • For the most part, established timeframes are met; or
  • Proper documentation is the norm and any issues with individual staff members are being addressed through performance evaluations (HR 6.02) and training (TS 2.03); or
  • In a few instances client or staff signatures are missing and/or not dated; or
  • Active client participation occurs to a considerable extent.
Practice requires significant improvement, as noted in the ratings for the Practice standards. Service quality or program functioning may be compromised; e.g.,
  • Procedures and/or case record documentation need significant strengthening; or
  • Procedures are not well-understood or used appropriately; or
  • Timeframes are often missed; or
  • In a number of instances client or staff signatures are missing and/or not dated (RPM 7.04); or
  • Quarterly reviews are not being done consistently; or
  • Level of care for some clients is inappropriate; or
  • Service planning is often done without full client participation; or
  • Appropriate family involvement is not documented; or
  • Documentation is routinely incomplete and/or missing; or
  • Assessments are done by referral source and no documentation and/or summary of required information present in case record; or
  • One of the Fundamental Practice Standards received a rating of 3 or 4.
Implementation of the standard is minimal or there is no evidence of implementation at all, as noted in the ratings for the Practice standards; e.g.,
  • No written procedures, or procedures are clearly inadequate or not being used; or
  • Documentation is routinely incomplete and/or missing; or  
  • Two or more Fundamental Practice Standards received a rating of 3 or 4.

Table of Evidence

Self-Study Evidence On-Site Evidence On-Site Activities
    • Service monitoring and re-assessment procedures
    • Documentation of case review
    • Interview:
      1. Clinical or program director
      2. Relevant personnel
      3. Individuals or families served
    • Review case records

  • DRCM 6.01

    Every individual participates in service monitoring, to include:

    1. confirmation, usually within one or two working days, that a service has been initiated according to the plan;
    2. verification, usually within 15 working days, that the service is appropriate and satisfactory;
    3. follow-up every month at a minimum, or as needed; and
    4. immediate response to any complaints or problems that develop in the delivery of service or with the person receiving services.

    Interpretation: The organization tailors the type and frequency of service monitoring according to the needs of persons receiving services, frequency and intensity of service provided, barriers and resources that emerge, and frequency of contact with informal caregivers and cooperating providers.

  • DRCM 6.02

    A re-assessment is conducted within five working days when there is a change in the individual or family’s status or circumstances, or a new issue or resource arises.

    Interpretation: An organization that, due to contractual requirements, is unable to conduct re-assessments according to these timeframes can modify them to meet the needs and goals of the population served.

  • DRCM 6.03

    The worker and a supervisor, or a clinical, service, or peer team, review cases routinely, consistent with established timeframes, to assess:

    1. recovery plan implementation;
    2. the service recipient’s progress toward achieving goals and desired outcomes; and
    3. the continuing appropriateness of service goals.

    Interpretation: Experienced workers may conduct reviews of their own cases. In such cases, the worker’s supervisor reviews a sample of the worker’s evaluations as per the requirements of the standard. A peer or committee review can supplement supervisor reviews, as required.

    Disaster Recovery case management is time limited. Case reviews should be conducted within meaningful timeframes that take into account the nature of the disaster, issues and needs of persons receiving services, the frequency, duration, and intensity of services provided, and resources available.

  • DRCM 6.04

    The worker and family regularly review progress toward achievement of agreed upon goals and sign revisions to service goals and plans.

Copyright © 2019 Council on Accreditation. All Rights Reserved.  Privacy Policy and Terms of Use