Measuring Outcomes of Person-centered Practices
Earlier in the Module, we talked about three types of evaluation: effort, fidelity of implementation, and outcome data. So far, we have been talking about effort and fidelity of implementation. The last type of evaluation data in an evaluation plan are the outcomes that are measured. The outcomes that are measured by teams will include quantitative or qualitative data. Each team will have different goals and different ways to measure them. Many HCBS providers collect similar types of outcome data.
Some examples of outcomes measured by HCBS providers include:
- Increases in relationship building and social skills for both staff and people receiving support,
- Changes in social and emotional skills for both staff and people receiving support,
- Decreases in challenging situations (e.g., injuries, staff illness, 911 or emergency calls),
- Quality-of-life surveys that assess the overall organization and for individual people receiving services,
- Organizational workforce issues like staff attrition and retention, and
- Community or interagency collaboration.
- Increases in quality of life scores completed by people supported and their families
- Interviews or stories that show how successful person-centered practices are in HCBS
- Staff attrition or retention summaries
- Decreases in workers compensation claims
- Changes in written documents such as policies and procedures (qualitative document review)
- Changes in incident reports with visual summaries of frequency, where, when, how, and why challenges occur
- Increases in the number of people indicating they are "very satisfied" with services on surveys
- Increases in the number of staff indicating they are "very satisfied with the work climate" on surveys
- Pre/post-tests of knowledge about person-centered practices
The evaluation plan provides a guide so that the team can show evidence that person-centered practices are being used as intended and that HCBS are improving lives for the wide range of stakeholders involved.
A public health organization formed a team to make changes in person-centered practices. The team reviewed how the organization’s plan of care was organized and discovered several ways to improve the written document. First, the team included more person-centered language in the plan of care and focused on issues that are Important To as well as Important For people. The team felt that the plan of care format was too long and hard to read so they changed the length and how it was organized. After these changes were made, a survey of families and people supported showed greater satisfaction with services.