Literature DB >> 16921817

Cancer Care Ontario and integrated cancer programs: portrait of a performance management system and lessons learned.

Siu Mee Cheng1, Leslee J Thompson.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: A performance management system has been implemented by Cancer Care Ontario (CCO). This system allows for the monitoring and management of 11 integrated cancer programs (ICPs) across the Province of Ontario. The system comprises of four elements: reporting frequency, reporting requirements, review meetings and accountability and continuous improvement activities. CCO and the ICPs have recently completed quarterly performance review exercises for the last two quarters of the fiscal year 2004-2005. The purpose of this paper is to address some of the key lessons learned. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: The paper provides an outline of the CCO performance management system.
FINDINGS: These lessons included: data must be valid and reliable; performance management requires commitments from both parties in the performance review exercises; streamlining performance reporting is beneficial; technology infrastructure which allows for cohesive management of data is vital for a sustainable performance management system; performance indicators need to stand up to scrutiny by both parties; and providing comparative data across the province is valuable. Critical success factors which would help to ensure a successful performance management system include: corporate engagement from various parts of an organization in the review exercises; desire to focus on performance improvement and avoidance of blaming; and strong data management systems. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The performance management system is a practical and sustainable system that allows for performance improvement of cancer care services. It can be a vital tool to enhance accountability within the health care system. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The paper demonstrates that the performance management system supports accountability in the cancer care system for Ontario, and reflects the principles of the provincial governments commitment to continuous improvement of healthcare.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16921817     DOI: 10.1108/14777260610680131

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Health Organ Manag        ISSN: 1477-7266


  6 in total

Review 1.  Quality improvement of paediatric care in the Netherlands.

Authors:  Tom W J Schulpen; Kiki M J Lombarts
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 3.791

2.  Accountability in the ontario cancer services system: a qualitative study of system leaders' perspectives.

Authors:  Jessica Bytautas; Mark Dobrow; Terrence Sullivan; Adalsteinn Brown
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2014-09

3.  Balanced performance measurement in research hospitals: the participative case study of a haematology department.

Authors:  Simona Catuogno; Claudia Arena; Sara Saggese; Fabrizia Sarto
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-08-03       Impact factor: 2.655

Review 4.  What do end-users want to know about managing the performance of healthcare delivery systems? Co-designing a context-specific and practice-relevant research agenda.

Authors:  Jenna M Evans; Julie E Gilbert; Jasmine Bacola; Victoria Hagens; Vicky Simanovski; Philip Holm; Rebecca Harvey; Peter G Blake; Garth Matheson
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2021-10-11

5.  Applying the balanced scorecard to local public health performance measurement: deliberations and decisions.

Authors:  Erica Weir; Nadine d'Entremont; Shelley Stalker; Karim Kurji; Victoria Robinson
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2009-05-08       Impact factor: 3.295

6.  Medical records department and balanced scorecard approach.

Authors:  Sima Ajami; Afsaneh Ebadsichani; Shahram Tofighi; Nahid Tavakoli
Journal:  J Educ Health Promot       Date:  2013-02-28
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.