Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Performance Improvement: A Multidimensional Model: Project Report
Performance Improvement: A Multidimensional Model: Project Report
351354
Project report
Performance improvement:
a multidimensional model
J. WOLFERSTEIG AND S. DUNHAM
Quality Management Division, Hudson River Psychiatric Center, Poughkeepsie, NY, USA
Objective
We believe that the next step in the evolution of performance
measurement and improvement systems will center on the
integration of an organizations strategic plan with performance measurement and improvement activities. This
project demonstrates how Hudson River Psychiatric Center
(HRPC) has achieved this integration.
Kaplan and Nortons Balanced Scorecard [1] model was
selected because it is used increasingly in the business world
to maintain a competitive position in the marketplace and
because of its potential applicability to health care. The
Balanced Scorecard provides a means to measure and manage
the success of the organizations strategy from four interrelated perspectives: financial, customer, internal business,
and innovation and learning. The model is used to clarify the
organizations strategy, link strategic objectives with specific
measures, develop initiatives and enhance organizational
learning.
The Balanced Scorecard concepts have been applied to a
behavioral health care setting and incorporate an additional
management focus the development of performance improvement priorities based on scorecard results.
Setting
Address correspondence to J. Wolfersteig, Quality Management Division, Hudson River Psychiatric Center, 373 North Road,
Poughkeepsie, NY 12601, USA. Tel: +1 914 452 8000 ext. 7235. Fax: +1 914 452 8040. E-mail: hrqajlw@omh.state.ny.us
The opinions presented in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the New York
State Office of Mental Health.
351
competitive strengths and weaknesses. These functions include leadership and vision, human resources, service delivery,
quality improvement, service utilization, financial planning
and management, consumer and financial accounting, management information and marketing and public relations.
At HRPC, 60 key managers worked in groups to rate the
organizations managed care readiness using the scoring in
the workbook.
The range of potential ratings included minimally prepared, beginning, moderately prepared, well along and
prepared. With respect to HRPCs findings, no functions
were rated minimally prepared or prepared. Three functions
were rated well along: Leadership and vision, Human resources and Quality improvement. Four functions were rated
moderately prepared: Service delivery, Service utilization,
Consumer and financial accounting and Marketing and public
relations. Two functions were rated beginning: Financial
planning and management and Management of information.
Needs identified were:
establish specific goals and objectives linked to daily
activities;
develop clinical specialty areas with clear outcome
expectations;
enhance performance appraisal programs, staff training, and competence assessments to support clinical
specialty areas;
shift measurement focus to satisfaction, access, utilization, quality and cost related to mission and vision;
establish public budgeting databases that integrate revenue and expenditure data with clinical information;
develop an integrated clinical information system, centering on an automated medical record;
establish a positive public awareness campaign.
The next step in the process compared these results with
JCAHO standards and existing clinical indicators to assure
all elements were addressed. This analysis yielded additional
needs in environment, safety and stakeholders. These results
were incorporated into the organizations mission, vision,
values, goals and objectives.
Following the development of the organizations strategic
plan, the Chief Executive Officer established corresponding
operational plans in eight areas:
development of product lines requiring the reorganization of inpatient services around the organizations specialized strengths (e.g. cognitive
remediation, externalizing disorders, polydipsia, mentally ill chemical abusers, secure care, evaluation/
stabilization);
development of a staff training and competence assessment plan to support the product lines;
development of performance measurement and improvement processes focusing on clinical outcomes
352
Performance improvement
HRPC develops new product lines (and measures effectiveness) for targeted populations, we will be likely to meet
the treatment needs of these populations; if we meet the
treatment needs of these targeted populations, patients are
likely to feel satisfied with their treatment outcomes. If
patients are satisfied with their treatment outcomes, recognition of HRPC as a facility of clinical excellence and
market viability will increase.
Following development of the underlying assumptions,
existing methods of data collection and measurement were
reviewed and new data collection and measurement strategies
were identified. With the exception of certain quality control
and risk management indicators, all existing performance
measurement indicators were discontinued and replaced by
process improvement projects, customer satisfaction instruments, clinical outcome assessment instruments and other
indicators. A total of 44 outcome measures was developed.
The JCAHO scoring model was adapted for use as it
provided a single uniform measurement process that could
be applied to all four areas of the Balanced Scorecard. This
system also allowed for weighting of certain measures and
provided a method for measuring areas under development
through capping of scores. Figure 1 depicts the general areas
included in the HRPC Balanced Scorecard [4,5].
Project results
Development of the HRPC Balanced Scorecard has consolidated many of the organizations measurement efforts
into a single document that provides greater clarity of focus.
This approach has afforded staff the opportunity to participate
in the establishment of HRPCs goals and objectives. The
staff has developed a sense of ownership for achieving the
organizations strategy and a greater awareness of their own
roles, thereby increasing the likelihood of success. The model
has also provided a framework for including all staff in
performance improvement activities organized around the
goals and objectives.
353
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to acknowledge the following people at
HRPC for their contributions to the project: James R. Regan
PhD, Chief Executive Officer; Martha Horning MSED, Supervisor of Rehabilitation; Jed Baumgold MPA, Director for
Administrative Services; and the staff who participated in the
process.
354
References
1. Kaplan RS, Norton DP. Translating Strategy into Action. Boston,
MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1996.
2. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations.
Comprehensive Accreditation Manual for Hospitals, the Official Handbook.
Chicago, IL: Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare
Organizations, 1996.
3. Mauer B, Jarvis D, Mockler R, Trabin T. How to Respond to
Managed Behavioral Healthcare: a Workbook Guide to Your Organizations
Success. Tiburon, CA: Centralink Publications, 1995.
4. Wolfersteig J, Dunham S, Regan J. Balanced scorecard development in a public behavioral healthcare organization. 14th
International ISQua Conference on Quality in Health Care,
Chicago, IL, 1997 (poster).
5. Wolfersteig J, Dunham S, Regan J, Horning M, Baumgold J.
Balanced scorecard development in a public behavioral healthcare
organization. Tenth Annual New York State Office of Mental
Health Research Conference, Albany, NY, 1997 (poster).
Accepted for publication 9 April 1998