Value bases of case management evaluation

Case management is designed to promote access to integrated, quality care for consumers, yet evaluations of case management show mixed results. This paper argues that part of the confusion stems from an unclarity about the value frames used to arrive at judgments of the merit or worth of case manage...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Evaluation and program planning 1993, Vol.16 (1), p.55-65
Main Authors: Kirkhart, Karen E., Ruffolo, Mary Carmel
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Attitudes
Case Management
Consumer Economics
Context Effect
Evaluation Methods
Human Services
Merit
Methodological Problems
Objectives
Program Evaluation
Service Delivery Assessment
Social Work Cases
Value Judgment
Values
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Case management is designed to promote access to integrated, quality care for consumers, yet evaluations of case management show mixed results. This paper argues that part of the confusion stems from an unclarity about the value frames used to arrive at judgments of the merit or worth of case management. This paper reviews six value frames commonly applied to human service evaluation and examines the particular relevance of each perspective for the evaluation of case management; they are: consumer needs, consumer wants, professional standards, program goals and objectives, models of practice, and judged or believed standards of merit. Illustrative studies are cited to tie the conceptual framework to current literature and provide direction for future evaluations. The paper outlines a process for selecting value frames and links their selection to six broader issues in case management evaluation: evaluation design and methodology, values underlying programs, definition of the independent variable, political and organizational contexts of evaluation, resource constraints, and metaevaluation. In conclusion, the paper argues that client need should be a predominant value frame in evaluating case management.
ISSN:0149-7189
DOI:10.1016/0149-7189(93)90037-9