Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
124 Merton St., Suite 502
Toronto, Ontario M4S 2Z2
Telephone: (416) 469-9954
Fax: (416) 469-8487
www.cathexisconsulting.ca...
Purpose of the Presentation
 To provide an example of transformative use of
performance measurement
We will cover. . .
 Background on the Accessibility for Ontarians
with Disabilities Act
 An overview on the development ...
Background on AODA
 The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 (AODA)
was adopted to improve accessibili...
Questions to be Addressed
 What dimensions (health, education, recreation, etc)
should be considered when developing perf...
Key Focus
 The extent to which the standards have had a
positive impact on Ontarians with disabilities,
older adults and ...
Developing the Indicators
 Understanding the ADO Standards
 Literature review
 Consultation with people with disabiliti...
Findings from the Literature
 Not agreed-upon definition – subjective to each
individual
 Schalock and his colleagues de...
Quality of Life Research Unit, Center for Health Promotion, University of Toronto
Key Elements of a QOL Framework
 Being:...
Findings from the Consultation
 Most respondents indicated that most indicators
were important
 Provision of health care...
The Priority Sort Process
 Want you to know . . .
• What Group Priority Sort is
• Why you might use Group Priority Sort (...
What is Priority Sort?
A participatory priority-ranking exercise
It can be used to:
 Define the scope of an evaluation
 ...
What is Priority Sort?
 Has small groups of stakeholders or
“experts” rank-order specified items
 The outputs are:
a) co...
Overview of Process
The Priority Sort:
Two Step Process
Recent Group Priority Sort: Quality of Life
Indicators for People with Disabilities
Rapid Sort Outcome
Sample Instructions:
Forced Sort
Now it gets more difficult...
 Refine your sort so that there are no more than
6 cards i...
Forced Sort Outcome
Analysis
Benefits of Priority Sort
Informed decision-making;
Enhanced understanding of the topic among
participants;
Strengthene...
When to use Priority Sort
 Not the right technique if you are exploring a
new area that nobody knows much about.
 Not a ...
Recommended Indicators
 Agreement on the high level indicators
• The over-arching indicators are:
• Being treated with di...
Recommended Indicators
Customer Service
Level of confidence that health care providers can provide services in a way
that...
Recommended Indicators
Employment
Accommodation is provided in the workplace for people with
disabilities
• links to prac...
The Recommended Indicators
Information
Information about local warnings/emergencies is available to and
can be accessed b...
Recommended Indicators
Transportation
Public transportation, taxis and GO trains are equally accessible for
people with d...
Learnings from this Process
 People with disabilities are interested in participating in consultations
related to accessi...
Research Questions
 To what extent have there been changes in
quality of life as it relates to the five AODA
Standards fo...
Suggested Monitoring Method
On-line survey
Interviews
Use of existing data
Monitoring Cycle
 Baseline (2013/14)
• Recruit monitoring participants
• Survey administered and analyzed
• Interviews co...
Strengths
 Builds on the consultation for developing the
indicators – people expressed interest in being
involved on an o...
Limitations
 Participants dropping off from the survey
• Annual contact will help mitigate this
• A small token of apprec...
Questions?
Accessibility Directorate of Ontario
Charene Gillies: Charene.Gillies@ontario.ca
Cathexis Consulting
Martha McG...
Developing Performance Measures Through a Consultative Process
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Developing Performance Measures Through a Consultative Process

563 views

Published on

Cathexis presentation for CES Toronto 2013 Evaluation Conference

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Developing Performance Measures Through a Consultative Process

  1. 1. 124 Merton St., Suite 502 Toronto, Ontario M4S 2Z2 Telephone: (416) 469-9954 Fax: (416) 469-8487 www.cathexisconsulting.ca Developing Performance Measures Through a Consultative Process June 2013
  2. 2. Purpose of the Presentation  To provide an example of transformative use of performance measurement
  3. 3. We will cover. . .  Background on the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act  An overview on the development of performance indicators to measure the extent to which the Act is really making a difference  An introduction to a method that can help with the selection of indicators when there are multiple stakeholders  An overview of the monitoring methods
  4. 4. Background on AODA  The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 (AODA) was adopted to improve accessibility for the 1.85 million people with disabilities in Ontario  The legislation covers five domains: • Customer Service • Information and Communication • Employment • Transportation • Built Environment  Standards have been development relating to each of those domains
  5. 5. Questions to be Addressed  What dimensions (health, education, recreation, etc) should be considered when developing performance indicators to measure the AODA’s impact on people with disabilities, older adults and their families  Which indicators can best account for the diversity among people with disabilities, older adults and their families (i.e. types of disabilities, degree of disability, age)  Which indicators will best measure quality of life improvements for people with disabilities, older adults and their families  What data collection tools can be used measure the performance indicators over time and with a limited budget
  6. 6. Key Focus  The extent to which the standards have had a positive impact on Ontarians with disabilities, older adults and their families
  7. 7. Developing the Indicators  Understanding the ADO Standards  Literature review  Consultation with people with disabilities, older adults and their families • Out reach through a number of vehicles • On-line survey with 426 respondents • Focus groups in Huntsville, Toronto, Ottawa, Thunder Bay and London with a total of 58 participants • Social media blog with no response • Submission (1)  Priority Sort process including a rapid sort and a more thoughtful sort  Finalizing indicators
  8. 8. Findings from the Literature  Not agreed-upon definition – subjective to each individual  Schalock and his colleagues developed a framework that focuses on empowerment rather than disability  Canadian Index of Well-being looks at indicators for that cover all Canadians  Quality of Life Research Unit at the University of Toronto’s Center for Health Promotion: “The degree to which a person enjoys the important possibilities of his or her life”
  9. 9. Quality of Life Research Unit, Center for Health Promotion, University of Toronto Key Elements of a QOL Framework  Being: Who One Is • Physical Being • Psychological Being • Spiritual Being  Belonging: Connection with One’s Environment • Physical Belonging • Social Belonging • Community Belonging  Becoming: Achieving Personal Goals, Hopes and Aspirations • Practical Becoming • Leisure Becoming • Growth Becoming
  10. 10. Findings from the Consultation  Most respondents indicated that most indicators were important  Provision of health care services was considered to be the most important  Gave advice on wording and consolidation of indicators  Based on the findings seven high level indicators and 26 specific indicators emerged
  11. 11. The Priority Sort Process  Want you to know . . . • What Group Priority Sort is • Why you might use Group Priority Sort (what the benefits are) • When it is (and is not) appropriate to use Group Priority Sort
  12. 12. What is Priority Sort? A participatory priority-ranking exercise It can be used to:  Define the scope of an evaluation  Select performance measures/indicators  Prioritize strategic planning goals  Define a complex concept
  13. 13. What is Priority Sort?  Has small groups of stakeholders or “experts” rank-order specified items  The outputs are: a) comparative rankings: b) rich qualitative data; and c) engaged participants  Evolved out of Q Methodology and produces similar information as Delphi
  14. 14. Overview of Process
  15. 15. The Priority Sort: Two Step Process
  16. 16. Recent Group Priority Sort: Quality of Life Indicators for People with Disabilities
  17. 17. Rapid Sort Outcome
  18. 18. Sample Instructions: Forced Sort Now it gets more difficult...  Refine your sort so that there are no more than 6 cards in each category  Try to come to agreement about where each benefit should go  Use blank cards to record any other important indicators (do not sort these)  You have 25 minutes
  19. 19. Forced Sort Outcome
  20. 20. Analysis
  21. 21. Benefits of Priority Sort Informed decision-making; Enhanced understanding of the topic among participants; Strengthened community of stakeholders; Confidence in the process and the resulting decisions; and An enjoyable and engaging experience for participants.
  22. 22. When to use Priority Sort  Not the right technique if you are exploring a new area that nobody knows much about.  Not a brainstorming exercise.  Priority Sort captures subjective opinions. If you are seeking objective facts, this is not the right method.  The Priority Sort is most useful when there are divergent opinions.
  23. 23. Recommended Indicators  Agreement on the high level indicators • The over-arching indicators are: • Being treated with dignity • Feeling an integrated part of school, work and the community • One high level indicator for each Standard • Customer service: Being served in a way that maintains dignity and supports inclusion • Employment: Have access to employment consistent with experience, abilities and training • Information: Have access to information • Transportation: Able to get where you need to go, when you need to go • Design of Public Spaces: Able to move independently around the community  Reduced the 26 indicators to 12
  24. 24. Recommended Indicators Customer Service Level of confidence that health care providers can provide services in a way that takes into account the person’s disability • links back to physical being, psychological being and physical belonging in the project’s methodological framework. Educational institutions provide services in a respectful manner • links to psychological being, social belonging, practical becoming and growth becoming in the project’s methodological framework. Emergency response services are provided in a manner that takes into account the person’s disability • links to physical being, psychological being, and community belonging in the project’s methodological framework. Recreation/fitness facilities provide services are provided in a way that allow people with disabilities to use and benefit from them • links to physical being, physical belonging and leisure becoming in the project’s methodological framework.
  25. 25. Recommended Indicators Employment Accommodation is provided in the workplace for people with disabilities • links to practical becoming in the project’s methodological framework.  Managers and co-workers at all levels accept and make accommodation for people with disabilities • links to social belonging and practical becoming in the project’s methodological framework. Career development opportunities are provided in a manner that accommodates people with disabilities • This indicator links to psychological being and practical becoming in the project’s methodological framework.
  26. 26. The Recommended Indicators Information Information about local warnings/emergencies is available to and can be accessed by people with disabilities • links to physical being, community belonging and practical becoming in the project’s methodological framework. Accessibility planning includes input from people with disabilities • links to psychological being and community belonging in the project’s methodological framework.  Websites are designed so that people with disabilities can access them • links to social belonging, community belonging, and practical becoming in the project’s methodological framework.
  27. 27. Recommended Indicators Transportation Public transportation, taxis and GO trains are equally accessible for people with disabilities as for people without disabilities • Links to psychological being, and community belonging in the project’s methodological framework Design of Public Spaces People with disabilities are able to get to stores, community centres and other public facilities • This indicator links to social belonging and community belonging in the project’s methodological framework
  28. 28. Learnings from this Process  People with disabilities are interested in participating in consultations related to accessibility want to see that the ADO is taking the impact of the AODA seriously.  The most effective recruitment occurred through organizations representing or serving the population  The survey provided an excellent sense of what was important for people with disabilities and supported reaching a large number of people  The face-to-face consultation augmented this understanding plus provided input into acceptable wording.  A large number of people with disabilities have access to the technology required to participate in on-line surveys  The steps taken to accommodate people with disabilities, as part of the consultation process, was noted and appreciated by participants.  It is still challenging to find facilities that are fully accessible  When conducting consultations, it is important to set the parameters in a way that keeps the discussion focused, but does not disrespect the importance of the other issues being raised.
  29. 29. Research Questions  To what extent have there been changes in quality of life as it relates to the five AODA Standards for people with disabilities, older adults and their families?  What impact do the Accessibility Standards have on key areas of daily living areas for people with disabilities, older adults and their families?
  30. 30. Suggested Monitoring Method On-line survey Interviews Use of existing data
  31. 31. Monitoring Cycle  Baseline (2013/14) • Recruit monitoring participants • Survey administered and analyzed • Interviews conducted and analyzed • Existing data analyzed • Baseline report produced  Interim year (2014/15) • Contact with participants  Second monitoring cycle (2015/16) • Survey administered and analyzed • Interviews conducted and analyzed • Existing data analyzed • Second report produced  Interim year (2016/17) • Contact with participants  Third monitoring cycle (2017/18) • Survey administered and analyzed • Interviews conducted and analyzed • Existing data analyzed • Review indicators to ensure continued relevancy • Third report produced
  32. 32. Strengths  Builds on the consultation for developing the indicators – people expressed interest in being involved on an ongoing basis  Covers all of the selected indicators  Cost-effective  Multiple lines of inquiry  Able to measure change over time  Able to measure statistical significance of change
  33. 33. Limitations  Participants dropping off from the survey • Annual contact will help mitigate this • A small token of appreciation can encourage ongoing participation  Self-selecting so cannot be generalized to the total population • With a large enough sample size and tri-angulation with other lines of inquiry we can speak to trends
  34. 34. Questions? Accessibility Directorate of Ontario Charene Gillies: Charene.Gillies@ontario.ca Cathexis Consulting Martha McGuire: martha@cathexisconsulting.ca Melissa McGuire: melissa@cathexisconsulting.ca

×