PA-PQI 3: Support for Performance and Outcomes Measurement*
An inclusive approach to establishing measured performance goals, client
, and sources of data ensures broad-based support for useful performance and outcomes measurement.
Senior managers and supervisors set forth performance and outcome expectations in a supportive manner and allay concerns about possible repercussions of identifying areas in need of improvement.
Staff throughout the agency and stakeholders, including partners and contractors, work together to:
- develop key outcomes and outputs;
- develop relevant qualitative and quantitative indicators; and
- identify data sources, including measurement tools and instruments.
Interpretation: Outcomes, outputs, indicators, tools, etc., may reflect reporting obligations, and for some services, may be established by contractual requirements.
The agency, depending on length and level of experience measuring outcomes, will start building a successful measurement system by using one or two measures of qualitative and quantitative data, if possible, for a few strong indicators. However, at minimum, performance and outcomes measures must be identified for high-risk services such as protective services, foster care, residential treatment, etc.
The agency selects performance measurement indicators that relate to operations and management
, program results, and client outcomes.
Interpretation: Examples of operations and management performance indicators could include:
- financial viability;
- system efficiency;
- effectiveness of risk prevention measures; and
- staff retention and job satisfaction.
Service delivery indicators influencing program results could include:
- timeliness and comprehensiveness of individualized assessments;
- family involvement;
- client satisfaction; and
- staff training.
Interpretation: For networks, in addition to the measures that address client outcomes and important dimensions of service delivery, the network may also measure important network administrative processes, such as:
- the average length of time between receiving a clean claim and paying the claim;
- the proportion of services that are evidence-based or meet nationally recognized treatment guidelines developed by consensus groups;
- the effectiveness of network training;
- the satisfaction of stakeholders, such as high volume referral agents (e.g., judges, court workers, employee assistance agents);
- penetration rates, or the proportion of the whole population eligible to be served by the network who actually receive services; and
- results of retrospective case record reviews, including the percentage of charts in which a placement decision includes an appropriate application of clinical criteria.