4.1 HEARTH: Data and Performance Measures (PPT)
•Download as PPT, PDF•
0 likes•410 views
The HEARTH Act puts increased emphasis on data collection, outcomes and performance measures. Communities are now required to track elements around reducing length of stay, reducing recidivism, and reducing first time homelessness. This workshop will discuss these new data elements, potential data collection methods, and how communities can manage for better performance around these measures.
![Principles of Performance-Based Contracting ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to 4.1 HEARTH: Data and Performance Measures (PPT)
Similar to 4.1 HEARTH: Data and Performance Measures (PPT) (20)
More from National Alliance to End Homelessness
More from National Alliance to End Homelessness (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
4.1 HEARTH: Data and Performance Measures (PPT)
- 1. NAEH CONFERENCE SUZANNE WAGNER HOUSING INNOVATIONS Data and Performance Measures
Editor's Notes
- Accountability – Providers should be accountable for efficient use of contract resources to deliver the highest quality services possible. Outcomes ‐ The performance‐based contracting initiative should be weighted towards measurable client outcomes (e.g. housing targets) rather than process indicators (e.g. number of service contacts or bed utilization). Fairness – Targets should be reasonable given resources available. The process should afford adequate time for providers to understand and communicate to staff the areas in which they will be evaluated prior to the start of the evaluation period. Performance data should be compiled monthly and available to staff promptly so that they understand how actual performance compares to desired performance and can make programmatic adjustments as necessary. Indicators and scoring mechanisms should be periodically re‐evaluated to ensure fairness and effectiveness at achieving desired system outcomes. Partnership ‐ To ensure the broadest possible ownership of goals and ultimate success, the initiative should be developed through a collaborative process that includes a pilot of adequate length to resolve design issues and implement programmatic changes prior to impact on program budgets. Simplicity ‐ To ensure that performance‐based contracting is an effective tool to motivate and manage program staff, the design should be simple enough to be readily understood. Efficiency – The system for tracking and reporting data should be automated and streamlined to avoid diverting program resources from service delivery. Transparency ‐ The methodology for measuring performance should be clear and transparent to all program staff. Accuracy ‐ To ensure confidence in the accuracy of data upon which performance will be judged, there should be a process through which providers can periodically review and reconcile data. Prompt Payment ‐ To maximize the utility of performance‐based contracting as a management tool, the associated rewards should closely follow performance.