Case management has evolved as a flexible, pragmatic, and compassionate strategy for improving client access and care continuity within fragmented systems of health and social services. The first-generation case management programs have been designed for various settings that serve different "target" populations with varying social, medical, and psychological needs. This proliferation of categorical case management programs is a mixed blessing. While a categorical focus reflects both historical and public financing priorities, it creates a potentially duplicative and inefficient system in an era of limited resources. As the federal government assumes a more substantial role in supporting case management, greater attention is being given to accountability--demonstrating value-added benefits and identifying best practices for structuring case management. The essential first step is reaching agreement on two critical dimensions of case management, major goals and essential services. This article, based on a review of the literature, examines the extent to which seemingly disparate programs for special populations share common attributes, and thus present opportunities for structuring client-focused rather than categorical case management programs. The authors seek to stimulate a dialogue that would lead to specification of common goals and essential services, and a cross-cutting framework for designing client-focused case management programs.