The development and use of Provider Profiles at the organizational and systems level

•Quality of life-related personal outcomes can be used at the microsystem level.•Quality of life-related personal outcomes can be aggregated to be used at the organizational level.•Quality of life-related personal outcomes can be aggregated to guide public policies.•Evidence-based outcomes should be...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Evaluation and program planning 2013-10, Vol.40, p.17-26
Hauptverfasser: Gómez, Laura E., Verdugo, Miguel Ángel, Arias, Benito, Navas, Patricia, Schalock, Robert L.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:•Quality of life-related personal outcomes can be used at the microsystem level.•Quality of life-related personal outcomes can be aggregated to be used at the organizational level.•Quality of life-related personal outcomes can be aggregated to guide public policies.•Evidence-based outcomes should be used by organizations to improve their quality.•A successful approach for organization-level service recipient quality of life assessment is reviewed. While the use of quality of life-related personal outcomes has been broadly reported during the last decade, little attention has been paid to the use of such data as a basis for developing and using Provider Profiles at the organizational and systems level. This article illustrates a way in which these evidence-based outcomes may be used not only to improve clinical decisions, but also managerial and policy strategies. To that end, the quality of life of 11,624 social service recipients was assessed by means of the application of the GENCAT Scale, a questionnaire to assess quality of life according to the eight-domain model (Schalock & Verdugo, 2002). Data were analyzed at organizational and the systems level in order to develop Provider Profiles. Once implemented, these profiles can be used to compare individuals in different diagnostic groups, develop province-level performance standards, encourage continuous program improvement, and guide the development of evidence-based policies
ISSN:0149-7189
1873-7870
DOI:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2013.05.001