|
Title
|
|
|
|
Standardization or discretionary space? A mixed-method study on government-imposed performance measurement instruments in social services
|
|
|
Author
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
| Despite the increased scientific interest in performance measurement instruments (PMIs) on the part of funders, governments, and social service organizations (SSOs), studies on professionals’ use of these instruments in their daily practice are still scarce. We examine the extent to which the characteristics of the organization and social worker explain how government-imposed PMIs are used. Using a mixed-method approach, we study social workers at a Belgian public SSO. Through in-depth interviews, we provide insight into the factors that influence their decision-making process when they rate clients. Subsequently, we draw on a quantitative survey (N=143) to verify the extent to which the results of our qualitative study are generalizable to a broader population. Our project shows that the instrument’s inability to capture complex problems and to include the client’s voice means that government-imposed PMIs cannot live up to the promise of standardized outcome measurement. |
|
|
|
Language
|
|
|
|
English
|
|
|
Source (journal)
|
|
|
|
The social service review : a quarterly devoted to the scientific and professional interests of social work. - Chicago, Ill., 1927, currens
|
|
|
Publication
|
|
|
|
Chicago, Ill.
:
2024
|
|
|
ISSN
|
|
|
|
0037-7961
1537-5404
[e-ISSN]
|
|
|
DOI
|
|
|
|
10.1086/727886
|
|
|
Volume/pages
|
|
|
|
98
:1
(2024)
, p. 4-33
|
|
|
ISI
|
|
|
|
001234659500002
|
|
|
Full text (Publisher's DOI)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Full text (open access)
|
|
|
|
|
The author-created version that incorporates referee comments and is the accepted for publication version Available from 13.02.2025
|
|
|
|
Full text (publisher's version - intranet only)
|
|
|
|
|
|