Comparing how to compare: an evaluation of alternative performance measurement systems in the field of social care

Paul Clarkson, David Challis, Sue Davies, Michael Donnelly, Roger Beech, Takayuki Hirano

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)
221 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Comparative performance evaluation has taken different forms depending upon the purposes of performance monitoring and the types of measures available. This paper investigates the different performance measurement systems in place in the social care setting, in particular for older people receiving community care services. In England, earlier systems to assist performance management within organizations have been eclipsed by national systems of regulation with top— down implementation of standards and measures. In Northern Ireland, by contrast, organizations have been compared descriptively without the use of national targets. Internationally, in Japan, organizations arranging similar services have had more local information available collected in a bottom—up fashion with greater employment of service user-level data. These differences in performance evaluation are located within an analytical framework permitting comparisons of system design and the use of measures. Conclusions are drawn concerning the breadth of evidence available for successfully monitoring service provision in this setting.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)59-79
Number of pages21
JournalEvaluation
Volume16
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 19 Jan 2010

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Development

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparing how to compare: an evaluation of alternative performance measurement systems in the field of social care'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this