Skip to main content
Log in

Regional variation in service system performance: Comparing the perceptions of key stakeholders

  • Regular Articles
  • Published:
The journal of mental health administration Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Area variation studies rarely focus on perceptions of service system performance in their comparative analyses. Using an instrument designed specifically for assessing key stakeholders’ perceptions of the performance of mental health service delivery systems, this study compared three areas in Massachusetts that differ significantly with regard to service system structure and resource allocation. Despite these differences, key stakeholders’ perceptions of service system adequancy, availability, quality, and coordination did not vary substantially, although the findings suggest that to some extent organizational structure may have more effect than resource availability and allocation on perceptions of key stakeholders within the three systems. These differences were also of far less magnitude than differences in hospitalization rates and other more traditional measures of service system performance. The authors argue that stakeholders’ perceptions should be considered, along with other standard performance measures, in evaluating service system performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wennberg JE, Gittleson A: Variations in medical care among small areas.Scientific American 1982;246: 120–133.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Fisher WH, Geller JL, Altaffer F, et al.: The relationship between community resources and state hospital recidivism.American Journal of Psychiatry 1992; 149:385–390.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Fisher WH, McDermeit M, Geller JL, et al.: Variations in Patterns of Service Use by the Severely Mentally Ill: The Role of Functional Level and Service System Characteristics. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Public Health Association, San Francisco, October 25, 1993.

  4. Morrissey JP, Ridgely S, Goldman H, et al.: Assessments of community mental health support systems: A key informant approach.Community Mental Health Journal. In press.

  5. Morrissey JP, Calloway M, Bartko WT, et al.: Local mental health authorities and service system change: Evidence from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Program on Chronic Mental Illness.Milbank Quarterly 1994; 72:49–90.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Northampton Consent Decree, Civil Action 76-4423-F (D-Mass, ordered December 7, 1978).

  7. Geller JL, Fisher WH, Wirth Cauchon JL, et al.: Second generation deinstitutionalization, I: The impact ofBrewster v Dukakis on state hospital case mix.American Journal of Psychiatry 1991; 147:982–986.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Goldman H, Lehman A, Morrissey J, et al.: Design for the national evaluation of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Program on Chronic Mental Illness.Hospital and Community Psychiatry 1990; 41:1217–1230.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Blalock HM:Social Statistics. New York: McGraw Hill, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This work was supported by National Institute of Mental Health Grant R01-MH46522-01.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fisher, W.H., Dickey, B. Regional variation in service system performance: Comparing the perceptions of key stakeholders. The Journal of Mental Health Administration 22, 68–76 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02519199

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02519199

Keywords

Navigation