This document discusses key performance indicators for public mental health services in Australia. It introduces the need for performance indicators to monitor and improve quality of care. A national framework was developed with input and criteria. The framework includes domains like effectiveness, appropriateness, efficiency, accessibility, continuity, responsiveness, capability, safety and sustainability. Specific indicators are proposed within each domain to provide a balanced view of inputs, processes, outputs and outcomes. The goal is a standardized set of indicators to evaluate performance over time and identify areas for improvement.

1. Case studying: Key
performance indicators in
public sector
By: Tatiana Yadykina

2. Key Performance
Indicators
for Australian
Public
Mental Health
Services
effective
appropriate
efficient
REPORT OF PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
responsive DRAFTING GROUP
accessible INFORMATION STRATEGY COMMITTEE
AHMAC NATIONAL MENTAL HEALTH
safe WORKING GROUP
continuous
capable
sustainable

3. Structure of presentation
Introduction of the problem

The National Mental Health Plan 2003-

2008
Developments in performance

indicators for mental health services
in Australia
Criteria used to evaluate candidate

indicators
Summary of performance framework and

proposed indicators

4. Introduction (1)
Key performance indicators are

essential tools for both
monitoring and improving the
quality of health services.
Mental health services have

lagged behind developments of
introducing performance
indicators.

5. Introduction (2)
The reasons:
 unavailability of suitable data
 lack of consensus about how
fundamental performance
measurement concepts should
be applied to mental health care

6. The National Mental Health
Plan 2003-2008
Phase 1 – indicators for initial

trial
Phase 2 – indicators for

development
National Mental Health Report


7. Developments in performance
indicators for mental health services
in Australia
Independent approaches of

States and Territories
Difficulties for the design of

performance indicators
The difference between

definitions and specifications of
existing State and Territory
performance indicators

8. Performance indicators may
be based on:
Inputs – the resources used in producing a

product or service
Processes – actions or processes applied

to convert resources into a product or
service
Outputs – products or services delivered

Outcomes – the outcomes of delivering the

product or service. Outcomes may be
short, intermediate, or long term.

9. Criteria used to evaluate
candidate indicators (1)
Be worth measuring.

Be measurable for diverse

populations.
Be understood by people who need

to act.
Be relevant to policy and practice.

Measurement over time will reflect

results of actions.
Be feasible to collect and report.

Comply with national processes


10. Criteria used to evaluate
candidate indicators (2)
Reliability.

Validity.

Cover the spectrum of the health issue.

Reflect a balance of indicators for all

appropriate parts of the framework.
Identify and respond to new and emerging

issues.
Be capable of leading change.

Provide feedback on where the system is

working well, as well as areas for
improvement.

11. Summary of performance
framework and proposed
indicators (1)
Domain – effective
 Consumer outcomes
 Carer outcomes
 Community tenure
Domain – appropriate
 Compliance with standards
 Relevance to client needs

12. Summary of performance
framework and proposed
indicators (2)
Domain – efficient
 Inpatient care
 Community care
Domain – accessible
 Access for those in need
 Local access
 Emergency response

13. Summary of performance
framework and proposed
indicators (3)
Domain – continuous
 Continuity between providers
 Cross-setting continuity
 Continuity over time
Domain – responsive
 Client perceptions of care
 Consumer & carer participation

14. Summary of performance
framework and proposed
indicators (4)
Domain – capable
 Provider knowledge and skill
 Outcomes orientation
Domain – safe
Domain – sustainable
 Workforce planning
 Training investment
 Research investment

15. Balanced emphasis on
inputs, processes, outputs and
outcomes (1)
Measures of input are necessary to

understand the capabilities and
structural characteristics of the
organization.
Measures of process are needed to

determine whether people receive
care that is evidenced-based or
conforms with consensus
expectations about quality.

16. Balanced emphasis on inputs,
processes, outputs and outcomes
(2)
 Output measures are needed to
understand the quantities of
services provided and develop
efficiency indicators.
 Outcome measures are the
basis for understanding whether
consumers are improving in
their clinical status and well
being.

17. Thank you for your
attention!!!!!!!
You are free to ask any
questions!!!!!