Assignment Prompt & Instructions
[>Sociology homework help](https://www.sweetstudy.com/fields/social-science-sociology)
Please see attached file
**files (2)**
– ## LASTWEEKASSIGNMENT.docx
– ## Itisunlikelythatanideaforaprogramwillgetinstantsupportfromstakeholders.docx
**## LASTWEEKASSIGNMENT.docx**
5
**Needs Assessment for a Relapse Prevention Program**
LAST WEEK ASSIGNMENT
March 22, 2026
**Program Description**
The change proposal that I present in the case of Still Waters Professional Counseling is Life Skills and Relapse Prevention Program of adults under substance use counseling. This is aimed at fixing the poor client engagement rates that I noted during field placement particularly among those who were required to attend counseling by the Department of Family and Children Services. Despite the numerous attendances of clients at their sessions, there are those who present low attendance, motivation and lack of coping skills outside counseling. The program would also involve role plays, guided discussions, weekly goal tracking, practice in triggers management and practice in routine building that would make the treatment more practical and action oriented. According to Dudley (2020), social work assessment is expected to reveal client issues and gaps in service. It is within that framework that this program would bring in additional structured and practical additions to assist clients by making counseling material translate into behavior change, which they need to practice on a daily basis.
**Inclusion Criteria in the Program**.
The target clientele would consist of adult clients who are already receiving substance use counseling in the agency. The first priority would be given to the clients that are court ordered or referred to Department of Family and Children Services, the clients with a specific behavior those results in relapse on a regular basis, and those clients that cannot always use the methods of coping without the sessions. The inclusion of these clients is due to the fact that they seem to require more than just traditional counseling. Their low attendance patterns imply that there is a discrepancy between the treatment attendance and the benefit of treatment. This at-risk population would be additional in terms of accountability, rehearsal, and support with the help of a structured skills-based program.
**Justification for the Proposed Program**
Semi structured interviews with clients that already receive substance use services is the first technique that I would utilize to collect credible information. Interviews would enable clients to explain the greatest problems they encounter when attempting to apply coping skills in their daily lives. Such an approach would offer in-depth information regarding the barriers in the form of low motivation, unstable routines, trigger exposure, and weak support systems. The needs assessment that incorporates the voices of the people affected by the service issue directly are more powerful (Ravaghi et al., 2023). This is why the interviews with clients would be a good source of first-hand evidence.
The second technique that I would employ is a short anonymous questionnaire that will be shared among clients and counselors. The client survey would help define the patterns regarding the obstacles to engagement, whereas the counselor survey would involve practice-based observations regarding service participation, risk of relapse, and unmet needs. The importance of using both groups is that the assignment requires the information of the clients and other stakeholders, and counselors are the major stakeholders in the planning and implementation of the program. The surveys would assist in understanding the prevalence of the problem within the agency and would supplement more profound information obtained with the help of interviews.
The two approaches are the best alternatives since interviews are in-depth and surveys are broad. They would then come up with credible evidence to support program development and implementation. It has been found that motivation, tangible assistance, and continuous involvement are core to substance use behavior change, which explains why a structured relapse prevention program and counseling should be implemented (Schwenker et al., 2023; Gaolaolwe et al., 2025). Such a strategy would reinforce the quality of the provided services and increase the likelihood of successful recovery in the clients in the long term.
References
Dudley, J. R. (2020). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Gaolaolwe, W., Moagi, M. M., Kovane, G. P., & Sehularo, L. A. (2025). Exploration of effective substance use relapse prevention programmes for the youth: An integrative literature review. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 32(3), 661–679. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpm.13144
Ravaghi, H., Guisset, A.-L., Elfeky, S., Nasir, N., Khani, S., Ahmadnezhad, E., & Abdi, Z. (2023). A scoping review of community health needs and assets assessment: Concepts, rationale, tools and uses. BMC Health Services Research, 23, Article 44.
[https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08983-3](https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08983-3)
Schwenker, R., Dietrich, C. E., Hirpa, S., Nothacker, M., Smedslund, G., Frese, T., & Unverzagt, S. (2023). Motivational interviewing for substance use reduction. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2023(12), CD008063. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008063.pub3
**## Itisunlikelythatanideaforaprogramwillgetinstantsupportfromstakeholders.docx**
It is unlikely that an idea for a program will get instant support from stakeholders. Rather, social workers must typically present a proposal that demonstrates critical thought and shows the need for such a program. In other situations, social workers may submit requests for funding on behalf of their agencies. Funding organizations may require a detailed proposal, which often includes a logic model showing the program’s elements.
Using a logic model, social workers can systematically analyze a proposed new program and how those various elements relate to each other. At the program level, the logic model establishes the connection between the resources needed, the program activities, and the anticipated outputs and outcomes. It may also include ways of measuring success. The logic model can provide a clear picture of the program for all stakeholders—and funding organizations, if applicable.
In this Assignment, you generate a logic model for the program you began to develop last week.
· Return, again, to the program that you identified last week based on the observed need. NOTE: last week assignment will be attached separately.
· Think about the resources that would be required to implement the program, such as time and money; program activities such training; outputs such as number of clients attending; and outcomes.
· Review the example on page 116 of the course text, and see the Logic Model Table document in the Learning Resources for assistance with format.
**Submit** the following:
· A completed program-level logic model outline (in table format) in which you consider inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes.
· Elaborate on your program-level logic model in 1 to 2 paragraphs. Include:
· The aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities
· Outputs and outcomes
· Reflection on how creating the logic model has helped you understand and envision the new program
Use the Learning Resources and peer-reviewed scholarly journal articles to support your logic model and reflection. Make sure to include appropriate APA citations and a reference list.
**SOCW_6311_Week5_Assignment_Rubric**
| | | |
| — | — | — |
| SOCW_6311_Week5_Assignment_Rubric |
| **Criteria** | **Ratings** | **Pts** |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeA completed program-level logic model outline (in table format) in which you consider inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes. | **22.5 to >20.02 ptsExceeds Expectation 90%-100%** Logic model meets expectations and exceeds by showing strong alignment across the columns of the table. Logic model demonstrates in-depth critical thinking in analyzing the proposed program and associated factors.<br> <br>**20.02 to >17.78 ptsMeets Expectation 80%–89%** Logic model is complete (includes inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes), and information is specific. Logic model demonstrates critical thinking in analyzing the proposed program and associated factors.<br> <br>**17.78 to >15.52 ptsFair 70%–79%** Logic model is mostly complete but may include occasional omissions. Information is general. Logic model demonstrates limited critical thinking in analyzing the proposed program and associated factors.<br> <br>**15.52 to >0 ptsNeeds Improvement 0%–69%** Logic model is incomplete, minimal, or missing. Logic model does not demonstrate critical thinking in analyzing the proposed program and associated factors. | 22.5 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeElaborate on your program-level logic model in 1 to 2 paragraphs. Include:…The aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities…Outputs and outcomes | **10 to >8.9 ptsExceeds Expectation 90%-100%** Response meets expectations and exceeds through additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.<br> <br>**8.9 to >7.9 ptsMeets Expectation 80%–89%** Response fully describes the aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities. Response fully describes outputs and outcomes. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.<br> <br>**7.9 to >6.9 ptsFair 70%–79%** Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of the aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities. Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of outputs and outcomes. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.<br> <br>**6.9 to >0 ptsNeeds Improvement 0%–69%** Response makes little or no attempt to describe the aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities. Response makes little or no attempt to describe outputs and outcomes. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response. | 10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReflection on how creating the logic model has helped you understand and envision the new program | **10 to >8.9 ptsExceeds Expectation 90%-100%** Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.<br> <br>**8.9 to >7.9 ptsMeets Expectation 80%–89%** Response fully reflects on how creating the logic model has helped understand and envision the new program. Specific details and examples are included. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.<br> <br>**7.9 to >6.9 ptsFair 70%–79%** Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed reflection on how creating the logic model has helped understand and envision the new program. General details and examples are included. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.<br> <br>**6.9 to >0 ptsNeeds Improvement 0%–69%** Response makes little or no attempt to reflect on how creating the logic model has helped understand and envision the new program. No details or examples are included. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response. | 10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting | **7.5 to >6.68 ptsExceeds Expectation 90%-100%** Paper meets length requirements, meets expectations, is generally error-free (two or fewer), and further exceeds by showcasing an exemplary scholarly voice to develop its message or communicate ideas. … Paper appropriately paraphrases sources, using one or fewer quotes. Presents polished APA Style. Citations, reference list, and paper formatting are generally error-free (two or fewer). … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.<br> <br>**6.68 to >5.93 ptsMeets Expectation 80%–89%** Paper meets length requirements and is clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor, minimal (three to five), and do not interfere with the scholarly message. The paper displays effective organization and focus to communicate ideas. … Paper appropriately paraphrases sources. Paper may use two to three short quotes but provides appropriate reference. Consistently documents sources in APA Style. Uses citations for ideas requiring attribution, with a few minimal errors (three to five). The reference list is complete and contains only minimal errors (three to five). Paper formatting is appropriate. There is a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.<br> <br>**5.93 to >5.18 ptsFair 70%–79%** Paper does not meet length requirements (either somewhat too short or too long). The paper is somewhat clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor but frequent (5–10) and occasionally interfere with the message. The paper lacks clear organization or occasionally strays from the focus. … Paper may rely on four short quotes or one to two long quotes (over 40 words) and/or does not sufficiently paraphrase material from other resources into student’s own words. Attempts to document sources in APA Style. Citations are present but contain frequent APA errors or omissions. A reference list is provided but is incomplete and/or contains frequent APA errors. Paper formatting may be incorrect (e.g., single-spaced or without a title page). … Occasionally lacks a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.<br> <br>**5.18 to >0 ptsNeeds Improvement 0%–69%** Paper does not meet length requirements (either significantly too short or too long). The paper lacks clarity and coherence. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are major, pervasive (11+), and interfere with the message. The paper is not organized or lacks focus. … Paper relies excessively on quoting (five or more short quotes or three or more long quotes [over 40 words]) and/or uses quoted material without paraphrasing or referencing the source of the material. Little or no attempt has been made to document sources in APA Style. Citations are infrequent or missing, and a reference list is not provided. Little or no attempt has been made to format the paper in APA Style. … There is no distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas reveal bias and subjectivity. | 7.5 pts |
Total Points: 50
**## Itisunlikelythatanideaforaprogramwillgetinstantsupportfromstakeholders.docx**
It is unlikely that an idea for a program will get instant support from stakeholders. Rather, social workers must typically present a proposal that demonstrates critical thought and shows the need for such a program. In other situations, social workers may submit requests for funding on behalf of their agencies. Funding organizations may require a detailed proposal, which often includes a logic model showing the program’s elements.
Using a logic model, social workers can systematically analyze a proposed new program and how those various elements relate to each other. At the program level, the logic model establishes the connection between the resources needed, the program activities, and the anticipated outputs and outcomes. It may also include ways of measuring success. The logic model can provide a clear picture of the program for all stakeholders—and funding organizations, if applicable.
In this Assignment, you generate a logic model for the program you began to develop last week.
· Return, again, to the program that you identified last week based on the observed need. NOTE: last week assignment will be attached separately.
· Think about the resources that would be required to implement the program, such as time and money; program activities such training; outputs such as number of clients attending; and outcomes.
· Review the example on page 116 of the course text, and see the Logic Model Table document in the Learning Resources for assistance with format.
**Submit** the following:
· A completed program-level logic model outline (in table format) in which you consider inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes.
· Elaborate on your program-level logic model in 1 to 2 paragraphs. Include:
· The aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities
· Outputs and outcomes
· Reflection on how creating the logic model has helped you understand and envision the new program
Use the Learning Resources and peer-reviewed scholarly journal articles to support your logic model and reflection. Make sure to include appropriate APA citations and a reference list.
**SOCW_6311_Week5_Assignment_Rubric**
| | | |
| — | — | — |
| SOCW_6311_Week5_Assignment_Rubric |
| **Criteria** | **Ratings** | **Pts** |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeA completed program-level logic model outline (in table format) in which you consider inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes. | **22.5 to >20.02 ptsExceeds Expectation 90%-100%** Logic model meets expectations and exceeds by showing strong alignment across the columns of the table. Logic model demonstrates in-depth critical thinking in analyzing the proposed program and associated factors.<br> <br>**20.02 to >17.78 ptsMeets Expectation 80%–89%** Logic model is complete (includes inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes), and information is specific. Logic model demonstrates critical thinking in analyzing the proposed program and associated factors.<br> <br>**17.78 to >15.52 ptsFair 70%–79%** Logic model is mostly complete but may include occasional omissions. Information is general. Logic model demonstrates limited critical thinking in analyzing the proposed program and associated factors.<br> <br>**15.52 to >0 ptsNeeds Improvement 0%–69%** Logic model is incomplete, minimal, or missing. Logic model does not demonstrate critical thinking in analyzing the proposed program and associated factors. | 22.5 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeElaborate on your program-level logic model in 1 to 2 paragraphs. Include:…The aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities…Outputs and outcomes | **10 to >8.9 ptsExceeds Expectation 90%-100%** Response meets expectations and exceeds through additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.<br> <br>**8.9 to >7.9 ptsMeets Expectation 80%–89%** Response fully describes the aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities. Response fully describes outputs and outcomes. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.<br> <br>**7.9 to >6.9 ptsFair 70%–79%** Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of the aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities. Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of outputs and outcomes. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.<br> <br>**6.9 to >0 ptsNeeds Improvement 0%–69%** Response makes little or no attempt to describe the aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities. Response makes little or no attempt to describe outputs and outcomes. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response. | 10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReflection on how creating the logic model has helped you understand and envision the new program | **10 to >8.9 ptsExceeds Expectation 90%-100%** Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.<br> <br>**8.9 to >7.9 ptsMeets Expectation 80%–89%** Response fully reflects on how creating the logic model has helped understand and envision the new program. Specific details and examples are included. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.<br> <br>**7.9 to >6.9 ptsFair 70%–79%** Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed reflection on how creating the logic model has helped understand and envision the new program. General details and examples are included. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.<br> <br>**6.9 to >0 ptsNeeds Improvement 0%–69%** Response makes little or no attempt to reflect on how creating the logic model has helped understand and envision the new program. No details or examples are included. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response. | 10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting | **7.5 to >6.68 ptsExceeds Expectation 90%-100%** Paper meets length requirements, meets expectations, is generally error-free (two or fewer), and further exceeds by showcasing an exemplary scholarly voice to develop its message or communicate ideas. … Paper appropriately paraphrases sources, using one or fewer quotes. Presents polished APA Style. Citations, reference list, and paper formatting are generally error-free (two or fewer). … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.<br> <br>**6.68 to >5.93 ptsMeets Expectation 80%–89%** Paper meets length requirements and is clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor, minimal (three to five), and do not interfere with the scholarly message. The paper displays effective organization and focus to communicate ideas. … Paper appropriately paraphrases sources. Paper may use two to three short quotes but provides appropriate reference. Consistently documents sources in APA Style. Uses citations for ideas requiring attribution, with a few minimal errors (three to five). The reference list is complete and contains only minimal errors (three to five). Paper formatting is appropriate. There is a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.<br> <br>**5.93 to >5.18 ptsFair 70%–79%** Paper does not meet length requirements (either somewhat too short or too long). The paper is somewhat clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor but frequent (5–10) and occasionally interfere with the message. The paper lacks clear organization or occasionally strays from the focus. … Paper may rely on four short quotes or one to two long quotes (over 40 words) and/or does not sufficiently paraphrase material from other resources into student’s own words. Attempts to document sources in APA Style. Citations are present but contain frequent APA errors or omissions. A reference list is provided but is incomplete and/or contains frequent APA errors. Paper formatting may be incorrect (e.g., single-spaced or without a title page). … Occasionally lacks a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.<br> <br>**5.18 to >0 ptsNeeds Improvement 0%–69%** Paper does not meet length requirements (either significantly too short or too long). The paper lacks clarity and coherence. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are major, pervasive (11+), and interfere with the message. The paper is not organized or lacks focus. … Paper relies excessively on quoting (five or more short quotes or three or more long quotes [over 40 words]) and/or uses quoted material without paraphrasing or referencing the source of the material. Little or no attempt has been made to document sources in APA Style. Citations are infrequent or missing, and a reference list is not provided. Little or no attempt has been made to format the paper in APA Style. … There is no distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas reveal bias and subjectivity. | 7.5 pts |
Total Points: 50
**## LASTWEEKASSIGNMENT.docx**
5
**Needs Assessment for a Relapse Prevention Program**
LAST WEEK ASSIGNMENT
March 22, 2026
**Program Description**
The change proposal that I present in the case of Still Waters Professional Counseling is Life Skills and Relapse Prevention Program of adults under substance use counseling. This is aimed at fixing the poor client engagement rates that I noted during field placement particularly among those who were required to attend counseling by the Department of Family and Children Services. Despite the numerous attendances of clients at their sessions, there are those who present low attendance, motivation and lack of coping skills outside counseling. The program would also involve role plays, guided discussions, weekly goal tracking, practice in triggers management and practice in routine building that would make the treatment more practical and action oriented. According to Dudley (2020), social work assessment is expected to reveal client issues and gaps in service. It is within that framework that this program would bring in additional structured and practical additions to assist clients by making counseling material translate into behavior change, which they need to practice on a daily basis.
**Inclusion Criteria in the Program**.
The target clientele would consist of adult clients who are already receiving substance use counseling in the agency. The first priority would be given to the clients that are court ordered or referred to Department of Family and Children Services, the clients with a specific behavior those results in relapse on a regular basis, and those clients that cannot always use the methods of coping without the sessions. The inclusion of these clients is due to the fact that they seem to require more than just traditional counseling. Their low attendance patterns imply that there is a discrepancy between the treatment attendance and the benefit of treatment. This at-risk population would be additional in terms of accountability, rehearsal, and support with the help of a structured skills-based program.
**Justification for the Proposed Program**
Semi structured interviews with clients that already receive substance use services is the first technique that I would utilize to collect credible information. Interviews would enable clients to explain the greatest problems they encounter when attempting to apply coping skills in their daily lives. Such an approach would offer in-depth information regarding the barriers in the form of low motivation, unstable routines, trigger exposure, and weak support systems. The needs assessment that incorporates the voices of the people affected by the service issue directly are more powerful (Ravaghi et al., 2023). This is why the interviews with clients would be a good source of first-hand evidence.
The second technique that I would employ is a short anonymous questionnaire that will be shared among clients and counselors. The client survey would help define the patterns regarding the obstacles to engagement, whereas the counselor survey would involve practice-based observations regarding service participation, risk of relapse, and unmet needs. The importance of using both groups is that the assignment requires the information of the clients and other stakeholders, and counselors are the major stakeholders in the planning and implementation of the program. The surveys would assist in understanding the prevalence of the problem within the agency and would supplement more profound information obtained with the help of interviews.
The two approaches are the best alternatives since interviews are in-depth and surveys are broad. They would then come up with credible evidence to support program development and implementation. It has been found that motivation, tangible assistance, and continuous involvement are core to substance use behavior change, which explains why a structured relapse prevention program and counseling should be implemented (Schwenker et al., 2023; Gaolaolwe et al., 2025). Such a strategy would reinforce the quality of the provided services and increase the likelihood of successful recovery in the clients in the long term.
References
Dudley, J. R. (2020). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Gaolaolwe, W., Moagi, M. M., Kovane, G. P., & Sehularo, L. A. (2025). Exploration of effective substance use relapse prevention programmes for the youth: An integrative literature review. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 32(3), 661–679. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpm.13144
Ravaghi, H., Guisset, A.-L., Elfeky, S., Nasir, N., Khani, S., Ahmadnezhad, E., & Abdi, Z. (2023). A scoping review of community health needs and assets assessment: Concepts, rationale, tools and uses. BMC Health Services Research, 23, Article 44.
[https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08983-3](https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08983-3)
Schwenker, R., Dietrich, C. E., Hirpa, S., Nothacker, M., Smedslund, G., Frese, T., & Unverzagt, S. (2023). Motivational interviewing for substance use reduction. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2023(12), CD008063. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008063.pub3
**## Itisunlikelythatanideaforaprogramwillgetinstantsupportfromstakeholders.docx**
It is unlikely that an idea for a program will get instant support from stakeholders. Rather, social workers must typically present a proposal that demonstrates critical thought and shows the need for such a program. In other situations, social workers may submit requests for funding on behalf of their agencies. Funding organizations may require a detailed proposal, which often includes a logic model showing the program’s elements.
Using a logic model, social workers can systematically analyze a proposed new program and how those various elements relate to each other. At the program level, the logic model establishes the connection between the resources needed, the program activities, and the anticipated outputs and outcomes. It may also include ways of measuring success. The logic model can provide a clear picture of the program for all stakeholders—and funding organizations, if applicable.
In this Assignment, you generate a logic model for the program you began to develop last week.
· Return, again, to the program that you identified last week based on the observed need. NOTE: last week assignment will be attached separately.
· Think about the resources that would be required to implement the program, such as time and money; program activities such training; outputs such as number of clients attending; and outcomes.
· Review the example on page 116 of the course text, and see the Logic Model Table document in the Learning Resources for assistance with format.
**Submit** the following:
· A completed program-level logic model outline (in table format) in which you consider inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes.
· Elaborate on your program-level logic model in 1 to 2 paragraphs. Include:
· The aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities
· Outputs and outcomes
· Reflection on how creating the logic model has helped you understand and envision the new program
Use the Learning Resources and peer-reviewed scholarly journal articles to support your logic model and reflection. Make sure to include appropriate APA citations and a reference list.
**SOCW_6311_Week5_Assignment_Rubric**
| | | |
| — | — | — |
| SOCW_6311_Week5_Assignment_Rubric |
| **Criteria** | **Ratings** | **Pts** |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeA completed program-level logic model outline (in table format) in which you consider inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes. | **22.5 to >20.02 ptsExceeds Expectation 90%-100%** Logic model meets expectations and exceeds by showing strong alignment across the columns of the table. Logic model demonstrates in-depth critical thinking in analyzing the proposed program and associated factors.<br> <br>**20.02 to >17.78 ptsMeets Expectation 80%–89%** Logic model is complete (includes inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes), and information is specific. Logic model demonstrates critical thinking in analyzing the proposed program and associated factors.<br> <br>**17.78 to >15.52 ptsFair 70%–79%** Logic model is mostly complete but may include occasional omissions. Information is general. Logic model demonstrates limited critical thinking in analyzing the proposed program and associated factors.<br> <br>**15.52 to >0 ptsNeeds Improvement 0%–69%** Logic model is incomplete, minimal, or missing. Logic model does not demonstrate critical thinking in analyzing the proposed program and associated factors. | 22.5 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeElaborate on your program-level logic model in 1 to 2 paragraphs. Include:…The aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities…Outputs and outcomes | **10 to >8.9 ptsExceeds Expectation 90%-100%** Response meets expectations and exceeds through additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.<br> <br>**8.9 to >7.9 ptsMeets Expectation 80%–89%** Response fully describes the aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities. Response fully describes outputs and outcomes. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.<br> <br>**7.9 to >6.9 ptsFair 70%–79%** Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of the aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities. Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of outputs and outcomes. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.<br> <br>**6.9 to >0 ptsNeeds Improvement 0%–69%** Response makes little or no attempt to describe the aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities. Response makes little or no attempt to describe outputs and outcomes. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response. | 10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReflection on how creating the logic model has helped you understand and envision the new program | **10 to >8.9 ptsExceeds Expectation 90%-100%** Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.<br> <br>**8.9 to >7.9 ptsMeets Expectation 80%–89%** Response fully reflects on how creating the logic model has helped understand and envision the new program. Specific details and examples are included. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.<br> <br>**7.9 to >6.9 ptsFair 70%–79%** Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed reflection on how creating the logic model has helped understand and envision the new program. General details and examples are included. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.<br> <br>**6.9 to >0 ptsNeeds Improvement 0%–69%** Response makes little or no attempt to reflect on how creating the logic model has helped understand and envision the new program. No details or examples are included. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response. | 10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting | **7.5 to >6.68 ptsExceeds Expectation 90%-100%** Paper meets length requirements, meets expectations, is generally error-free (two or fewer), and further exceeds by showcasing an exemplary scholarly voice to develop its message or communicate ideas. … Paper appropriately paraphrases sources, using one or fewer quotes. Presents polished APA Style. Citations, reference list, and paper formatting are generally error-free (two or fewer). … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.<br> <br>**6.68 to >5.93 ptsMeets Expectation 80%–89%** Paper meets length requirements and is clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor, minimal (three to five), and do not interfere with the scholarly message. The paper displays effective organization and focus to communicate ideas. … Paper appropriately paraphrases sources. Paper may use two to three short quotes but provides appropriate reference. Consistently documents sources in APA Style. Uses citations for ideas requiring attribution, with a few minimal errors (three to five). The reference list is complete and contains only minimal errors (three to five). Paper formatting is appropriate. There is a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.<br> <br>**5.93 to >5.18 ptsFair 70%–79%** Paper does not meet length requirements (either somewhat too short or too long). The paper is somewhat clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor but frequent (5–10) and occasionally interfere with the message. The paper lacks clear organization or occasionally strays from the focus. … Paper may rely on four short quotes or one to two long quotes (over 40 words) and/or does not sufficiently paraphrase material from other resources into student’s own words. Attempts to document sources in APA Style. Citations are present but contain frequent APA errors or omissions. A reference list is provided but is incomplete and/or contains frequent APA errors. Paper formatting may be incorrect (e.g., single-spaced or without a title page). … Occasionally lacks a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.<br> <br>**5.18 to >0 ptsNeeds Improvement 0%–69%** Paper does not meet length requirements (either significantly too short or too long). The paper lacks clarity and coherence. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are major, pervasive (11+), and interfere with the message. The paper is not organized or lacks focus. … Paper relies excessively on quoting (five or more short quotes or three or more long quotes [over 40 words]) and/or uses quoted material without paraphrasing or referencing the source of the material. Little or no attempt has been made to document sources in APA Style. Citations are infrequent or missing, and a reference list is not provided. Little or no attempt has been made to format the paper in APA Style. … There is no distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas reveal bias and subjectivity. | 7.5 pts |
Total Points: 50
**## LASTWEEKASSIGNMENT.docx**
5
**Needs Assessment for a Relapse Prevention Program**
LAST WEEK ASSIGNMENT
March 22, 2026
**Program Description**
The change proposal that I present in the case of Still Waters Professional Counseling is Life Skills and Relapse Prevention Program of adults under substance use counseling. This is aimed at fixing the poor client engagement rates that I noted during field placement particularly among those who were required to attend counseling by the Department of Family and Children Services. Despite the numerous attendances of clients at their sessions, there are those who present low attendance, motivation and lack of coping skills outside counseling. The program would also involve role plays, guided discussions, weekly goal tracking, practice in triggers management and practice in routine building that would make the treatment more practical and action oriented. According to Dudley (2020), social work assessment is expected to reveal client issues and gaps in service. It is within that framework that this program would bring in additional structured and practical additions to assist clients by making counseling material translate into behavior change, which they need to practice on a daily basis.
**Inclusion Criteria in the Program**.
The target clientele would consist of adult clients who are already receiving substance use counseling in the agency. The first priority would be given to the clients that are court ordered or referred to Department of Family and Children Services, the clients with a specific behavior those results in relapse on a regular basis, and those clients that cannot always use the methods of coping without the sessions. The inclusion of these clients is due to the fact that they seem to require more than just traditional counseling. Their low attendance patterns imply that there is a discrepancy between the treatment attendance and the benefit of treatment. This at-risk population would be additional in terms of accountability, rehearsal, and support with the help of a structured skills-based program.
**Justification for the Proposed Program**
Semi structured interviews with clients that already receive substance use services is the first technique that I would utilize to collect credible information. Interviews would enable clients to explain the greatest problems they encounter when attempting to apply coping skills in their daily lives. Such an approach would offer in-depth information regarding the barriers in the form of low motivation, unstable routines, trigger exposure, and weak support systems. The needs assessment that incorporates the voices of the people affected by the service issue directly are more powerful (Ravaghi et al., 2023). This is why the interviews with clients would be a good source of first-hand evidence.
The second technique that I would employ is a short anonymous questionnaire that will be shared among clients and counselors. The client survey would help define the patterns regarding the obstacles to engagement, whereas the counselor survey would involve practice-based observations regarding service participation, risk of relapse, and unmet needs. The importance of using both groups is that the assignment requires the information of the clients and other stakeholders, and counselors are the major stakeholders in the planning and implementation of the program. The surveys would assist in understanding the prevalence of the problem within the agency and would supplement more profound information obtained with the help of interviews.
The two approaches are the best alternatives since interviews are in-depth and surveys are broad. They would then come up with credible evidence to support program development and implementation. It has been found that motivation, tangible assistance, and continuous involvement are core to substance use behavior change, which explains why a structured relapse prevention program and counseling should be implemented (Schwenker et al., 2023; Gaolaolwe et al., 2025). Such a strategy would reinforce the quality of the provided services and increase the likelihood of successful recovery in the clients in the long term.
References
Dudley, J. R. (2020). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Gaolaolwe, W., Moagi, M. M., Kovane, G. P., & Sehularo, L. A. (2025). Exploration of effective substance use relapse prevention programmes for the youth: An integrative literature review. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 32(3), 661–679. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpm.13144
Ravaghi, H., Guisset, A.-L., Elfeky, S., Nasir, N., Khani, S., Ahmadnezhad, E., & Abdi, Z. (2023). A scoping review of community health needs and assets assessment: Concepts, rationale, tools and uses. BMC Health Services Research, 23, Article 44.
[https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08983-3](https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08983-3)
Schwenker, R., Dietrich, C. E., Hirpa, S., Nothacker, M., Smedslund, G., Frese, T., & Unverzagt, S. (2023). Motivational interviewing for substance use reduction. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2023(12), CD008063. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008063.pub3
**## Itisunlikelythatanideaforaprogramwillgetinstantsupportfromstakeholders.docx**
It is unlikely that an idea for a program will get instant support from stakeholders. Rather, social workers must typically present a proposal that demonstrates critical thought and shows the need for such a program. In other situations, social workers may submit requests for funding on behalf of their agencies. Funding organizations may require a detailed proposal, which often includes a logic model showing the program’s elements.
Using a logic model, social workers can systematically analyze a proposed new program and how those various elements relate to each other. At the program level, the logic model establishes the connection between the resources needed, the program activities, and the anticipated outputs and outcomes. It may also include ways of measuring success. The logic model can provide a clear picture of the program for all stakeholders—and funding organizations, if applicable.
In this Assignment, you generate a logic model for the program you began to develop last week.
· Return, again, to the program that you identified last week based on the observed need. NOTE: last week assignment will be attached separately.
· Think about the resources that would be required to implement the program, such as time and money; program activities such training; outputs such as number of clients attending; and outcomes.
· Review the example on page 116 of the course text, and see the Logic Model Table document in the Learning Resources for assistance with format.
**Submit** the following:
· A completed program-level logic model outline (in table format) in which you consider inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes.
· Elaborate on your program-level logic model in 1 to 2 paragraphs. Include:
· The aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities
· Outputs and outcomes
· Reflection on how creating the logic model has helped you understand and envision the new program
Use the Learning Resources and peer-reviewed scholarly journal articles to support your logic model and reflection. Make sure to include appropriate APA citations and a reference list.
**SOCW_6311_Week5_Assignment_Rubric**
| | | |
| — | — | — |
| SOCW_6311_Week5_Assignment_Rubric |
| **Criteria** | **Ratings** | **Pts** |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeA completed program-level logic model outline (in table format) in which you consider inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes. | **22.5 to >20.02 ptsExceeds Expectation 90%-100%** Logic model meets expectations and exceeds by showing strong alignment across the columns of the table. Logic model demonstrates in-depth critical thinking in analyzing the proposed program and associated factors.<br> <br>**20.02 to >17.78 ptsMeets Expectation 80%–89%** Logic model is complete (includes inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes), and information is specific. Logic model demonstrates critical thinking in analyzing the proposed program and associated factors.<br> <br>**17.78 to >15.52 ptsFair 70%–79%** Logic model is mostly complete but may include occasional omissions. Information is general. Logic model demonstrates limited critical thinking in analyzing the proposed program and associated factors.<br> <br>**15.52 to >0 ptsNeeds Improvement 0%–69%** Logic model is incomplete, minimal, or missing. Logic model does not demonstrate critical thinking in analyzing the proposed program and associated factors. | 22.5 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeElaborate on your program-level logic model in 1 to 2 paragraphs. Include:…The aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities…Outputs and outcomes | **10 to >8.9 ptsExceeds Expectation 90%-100%** Response meets expectations and exceeds through additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.<br> <br>**8.9 to >7.9 ptsMeets Expectation 80%–89%** Response fully describes the aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities. Response fully describes outputs and outcomes. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.<br> <br>**7.9 to >6.9 ptsFair 70%–79%** Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of the aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities. Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of outputs and outcomes. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.<br> <br>**6.9 to >0 ptsNeeds Improvement 0%–69%** Response makes little or no attempt to describe the aim/goal of the program and proposed program activities. Response makes little or no attempt to describe outputs and outcomes. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response. | 10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReflection on how creating the logic model has helped you understand and envision the new program | **10 to >8.9 ptsExceeds Expectation 90%-100%** Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.<br> <br>**8.9 to >7.9 ptsMeets Expectation 80%–89%** Response fully reflects on how creating the logic model has helped understand and envision the new program. Specific details and examples are included. … Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.<br> <br>**7.9 to >6.9 ptsFair 70%–79%** Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed reflection on how creating the logic model has helped understand and envision the new program. General details and examples are included. … Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.<br> <br>**6.9 to >0 ptsNeeds Improvement 0%–69%** Response makes little or no attempt to reflect on how creating the logic model has helped understand and envision the new program. No details or examples are included. … Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response. | 10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting | **7.5 to >6.68 ptsExceeds Expectation 90%-100%** Paper meets length requirements, meets expectations, is generally error-free (two or fewer), and further exceeds by showcasing an exemplary scholarly voice to develop its message or communicate ideas. … Paper appropriately paraphrases sources, using one or fewer quotes. Presents polished APA Style. Citations, reference list, and paper formatting are generally error-free (two or fewer). … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.<br> <br>**6.68 to >5.93 ptsMeets Expectation 80%–89%** Paper meets length requirements and is clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor, minimal (three to five), and do not interfere with the scholarly message. The paper displays effective organization and focus to communicate ideas. … Paper appropriately paraphrases sources. Paper may use two to three short quotes but provides appropriate reference. Consistently documents sources in APA Style. Uses citations for ideas requiring attribution, with a few minimal errors (three to five). The reference list is complete and contains only minimal errors (three to five). Paper formatting is appropriate. There is a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.<br> <br>**5.93 to >5.18 ptsFair 70%–79%** Paper does not meet length requirements (either somewhat too short or too long). The paper is somewhat clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor but frequent (5–10) and occasionally interfere with the message. The paper lacks clear organization or occasionally strays from the focus. … Paper may rely on four short quotes or one to two long quotes (over 40 words) and/or does not sufficiently paraphrase material from other resources into student’s own words. Attempts to document sources in APA Style. Citations are present but contain frequent APA errors or omissions. A reference list is provided but is incomplete and/or contains frequent APA errors. Paper formatting may be incorrect (e.g., single-spaced or without a title page). … Occasionally lacks a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.<br> <br>**5.18 to >0 ptsNeeds Improvement 0%–69%** Paper does not meet length requirements (either significantly too short or too long). The paper lacks clarity and coherence. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are major, pervasive (11+), and interfere with the message. The paper is not organized or lacks focus. … Paper relies excessively on quoting (five or more short quotes or three or more long quotes [over 40 words]) and/or uses quoted material without paraphrasing or referencing the source of the material. Little or no attempt has been made to document sources in APA Style. Citations are infrequent or missing, and a reference list is not provided. Little or no attempt has been made to format the paper in APA Style. … There is no distinction between cited content and original thought. … Tone and presentation of ideas reveal bias and subjectivity. | 7.5 pts |
Total Points: 50