Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 38
Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 38-311 (2026)

Scope of practice

✓ text as last checked Oct. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) The scope of practice for alcohol and drug counseling is the application of general counseling theories and treatment methods adapted to specific addiction theory and research for the express purpose of treating any alcohol or drug abuse, dependence, or disorder. The practice of alcohol and drug counseling consists of the following performance areas which encompass the twelve core functions: Clinical evaluation; treatment planning; counseling; education; documentation; and professional and ethical standards.

(2) The performance area of clinical evaluation consists of screening and assessment of alcohol and drug problems, screening of other presenting problems for which referral may be necessary, and diagnosis of alcohol and drug disorders. Clinical evaluation does not include mental health assessment or treatment. An alcohol and drug counselor shall refer a person with co-occurring mental disorders unless such person is under the care of, or previously assessed or diagnosed by, an appropriate practitioner within a reasonable amount of time.

(3) The performance area of treatment planning consists of case management, including implementing the treatment plan, consulting, and continuing assessment and treatment planning; referral; and client advocacy.

(4) The performance area of counseling consists of individual counseling, group counseling, and family or significant other counseling.

(5) The performance area of education consists of education for clients, family of clients, and the community.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case (1 in the last 5 years), 2024–2024 · leading case: State v. Jones, 10 N.W.3d 747 (Neb. 2024).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Jones, 10 N.W.3d 747 (Neb. 2024). · cites it 2× “” 26 But we agreed with the district court that the defendant was engaged in the practice of veterinary medicine and, as such, was required to hold a credential under what was then known as the Uniform Licensing Law. 27 We reached this conclusion by considering the defendant’s…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.