ScholarGate
Assistant
Process / pipelineProgram-model fidelity scales

Case Management Fidelity Assessment

Case management fidelity assessment measures how closely a case-management or care-coordination program matches the defined model it claims to implement — such as assertive community treatment, intensive case management, or a strengths model — by rating specific structural and process dimensions on anchored scales and aggregating them into an overall fidelity score. The approach was established by the Dartmouth tradition of Teague, Bond, and Drake, whose Assertive Community Treatment fidelity scale became the template for measuring whether a program is delivering its model in practice or only in name.

Open in MethodMindSoonApply, compare, get guidance
Tools & resources
Download slides
Learn & explore
VideoSoon

Read the full method

Members only

Sign in with a free account to read this section.

Sign in

Method map

The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.

Sources

  1. Teague, G. B., Bond, G. R., & Drake, R. E. (1998). Program fidelity in assertive community treatment: Development and use of a measure. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 68(2), 216–232. DOI: 10.1037/h0080331
  2. Bond, G. R., Evans, L., Salyers, M. P., Williams, J., & Kim, H. W. (2000). Measurement of fidelity in psychiatric rehabilitation. Mental Health Services Research, 2(2), 75–87. DOI: 10.1023/A:1010153020697

How to cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 22). Fidelity Assessment of Case Management and Care Coordination Models. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/social-work/case-management-fidelity

Which method?

Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.

Compare side by side

Referenced by

ScholarGateCase Management Fidelity Assessment (Fidelity Assessment of Case Management and Care Coordination Models). Retrieved 2026-06-24 from https://scholargate.app/en/social-work/case-management-fidelity · Dataset: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026