Adapting Washington Circle performance measures for public sector substance abuse treatment systems
Received 27 February 2008; received in revised form 12 June 2008; accepted 22 June 2008. published online 26 August 2008.
Abstract
The Washington Circle, a group focused on developing and disseminating performance measures for substance abuse services, developed three such measures for private health plans. In this article, we explore whether these measures are appropriate for meeting measurement goals in the public sector and feasible to calculate in the public sector using data collected for administrative purposes by state and local substance abuse and/or mental health agencies. Working collaboratively, 12 states specified revised measures and 6 states pilot tested them. Two measures were retained from the original specifications: initiation of treatment and treatment engagement. Additional measures were focused on continuity of care after assessment, detoxification, residential or inpatient care. These data demonstrate that state agencies can calculate performance measures from routinely available information and that there is wide variability in these indicators. Ongoing research is needed to examine the reasons for these results, which might include lack of patient interest or commitment, need for quality improvement efforts, or financial issues.
Institute for Behavioral Health, Schneider Institutes for Health Policy, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA 02454, USA
Corresponding author. Institute for Behavioral Health, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, Mail stop 035, 415 South St., Waltham, MA 02454, USA. Tel.: +1 781 736 3840; fax: +1 781 736 3985.
1 Kathleen Nardini (Abt Associates Inc.); Melissa Lahr Thomas, M.Ed., Meena Shahi (Arizona Department of Health Services); Sarah A. Wattenberg, LCSW-C, Frances Cotter, MA, MPH, Hal Krause, Anne Herron, M.S., (Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration); Michael J. Hettinger (Connecticut Dept. of Mental Health and Addiction Services); Astrid Beigel, Ph.D. (County of Los Angeles, Department of Mental Health); Teresa Anderson, Ph.D. (Center for Health Policy and Research, Commonwealth Medicine); Doreen A. Cavanaugh, Ph.D. (Georgetown University Public Policy Institute); Charles Bartlett, MSW (Kansas Social and Rehabilitation Services); Andrew Hanchett, M.P.H. (Massachusetts Department of Public Health); Jay Ford, Ph.D. (Network for the Improvement of Addiction Treatment); Maria D. Canfield, Brad Towle, MA, MPA (Nevada Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Agency); Frank McCorry, Ph.D., Robert J. Gallati, M.A., Dawn Lambert-Wacey, M.A. (New York State Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services); Spencer Clark, ACSW, Adam Holtzman (North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services); Steve Davis, Ph.D., Mark Reynolds, Ed.D., Tracy Leeper, M.A. (Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services); Christina Dye, MPH (Recovery Innovations of Arizona); Ann Doucette, Ph.D. (The George Washington University); Kay Miller (Thomson Healthcare); Mady Chalk, Ph.D., Jack Kemp, M.S. (Treatment Research Institute); Constance Weisner, Dr. P.H., MSW (University of California, San Francisco/Kaiser Permanente); Minakshi Tikoo, Ph.D. (University of Connecticut Health Center); Keith Humphreys, Ph.D. (VA Palo Alto Health Care System); Craig Anne Heflinger, Ph.D., Robert Saunders, Ph.D. (Vanderbilt University); Barbara A. Cimaglio (Vermont Department of Health); Kevin Campbell, Ph.D. (Washington State Division of Alcohol and Substance Abuse).
ABSTRACT