Approaches to risk-adjusting outcome measures applied to criminal justice involvement after community service

The ethic of fairness in program evaluation requires that measures of behavioral health agency performance be sensitive to differences in those agencies' caseload composition. The authors describe two traditional approaches to the statistical risk adjustment of outcome measures (stratification...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The journal of behavioral health services & research 2001-08, Vol.28 (3), p.235-246
Main Authors: Banks, S M, Pandiani, J A, Bramley, J
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Age
Capitation
Clinical outcomes
Community Mental Health Services - standards
Community Mental Health Services - utilization
Community service
Crime - statistics & numerical data
Female
Health care
Health services
Humans
Imprisonment
Male
Mental disorders
Mental health
Mental health care
Mental health services
Middle Aged
Models, Statistical
Mortality
Observational studies
Offenders
Outcome Assessment (Health Care) - methods
Performance evaluation
Performance indicators
Program Evaluation
Public Health Administration - standards
Quality Indicators, Health Care
Retrospective Studies
Risk Adjustment
Sampling Studies
Smoking
Statistical analysis
Studies
Vermont - epidemiology
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:The ethic of fairness in program evaluation requires that measures of behavioral health agency performance be sensitive to differences in those agencies' caseload composition. The authors describe two traditional approaches to the statistical risk adjustment of outcome measures (stratification weighting and pre-post measurement) that are designed to account for differences in caseload composition and introduce a method that incorporates the strengths of both approaches. Procedures for deriving each of these measures are described in detail and demonstrated in the evaluation of a statewide system of community-based behavioral health care programs. This evaluation examines the degree to which service recipients get into trouble with the law after treatment. Three measures are recommended for inclusion in outcome-oriented "report cards," and the interpretation of each measure is discussed. Finally, the authors suggest formats for graphic and tabular presentation of the risk-adjusted evaluation for sharing findings with diverse stakeholder groups.
ISSN:1094-3412
1556-3308
DOI:10.1007/BF02287241