Service Performance Measurement System for Human Services

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Human services providers face challenges in measuring the impact of their services due to a lack of continuous, real-time data on client-specific changes and outcomes, high costs of external program evaluations, and inability to attribute outcomes effectively, making it difficult to report success and manage service delivery efficiently.

Innovation Solution

A system and method for measuring service performance that includes receiving and processing client and service information to compare against baseline measures, providing real-time performance data to program managers, and utilizing a network system with case worker and administration workstations to generate and display performance reports, enabling continuous monitoring and cost-effective impact measurement.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If HSPs outsource program evaluation services to measure service impact, then measurement reliability is improved, but cost increases significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveservice impact measurementVSAvoidcost
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables HSPs to conduct their own program evaluations using automated data collection and analysis tools. The case management system automatically tracks client outcomes and calculates impact metrics, eliminating the need to outsource evaluation services while maintaining measurement reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

Manual evaluation processes are replaced with automated computer-based systems that collect, process, and analyze service outcome data. The system uses software algorithms to calculate impact metrics automatically, substituting human evaluators with computational processes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

2Measurement precision

If HSPs use traditional evaluation methods to measure service outcomes, then measurement accuracy is improved, but time delay increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoutcome measurementVSAvoidevaluation time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system continuously collects and processes service outcome data in real-time as services are delivered. Rather than conducting periodic evaluations, the system maintains continuous monitoring of client progress and outcomes, providing up-to-date impact measurements without time delays.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #20Continuity of useful action

Solution Approach 2:

The system pre-establishes outcome measurement protocols and data collection mechanisms before services begin. Baseline client conditions are assessed in advance, and the system is configured to automatically track and measure changes against these baselines as services progress.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Loss of information

If HSPs implement comprehensive outcome tracking for all clients, then measurement completeness is improved, but system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoutcome data completenessVSAvoidmeasurement system
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of informationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The case management system performs multiple functions including client intake, service delivery coordination, outcome tracking, and impact calculation within a single integrated platform. This universal system handles all measurement needs without requiring separate complex systems for each function.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The system combines outcome tracking with existing case management processes. Rather than adding a separate tracking system, the outcome measurement capabilities are merged into the case management software that HSPs already use to coordinate services, reducing overall system complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

4Ease of operation

If HSPs measure only program outcomes (successful exits), then ease of measurement is improved, but attribution accuracy deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoutcome measurementVSAvoidoutcome attribution
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments outcomes into two categories: client-specific changes (CICCs) and program outcomes (successful exits). Each type is measured and attributed separately using appropriate methods, allowing precise attribution for each outcome type rather than using a single measurement approach for all outcomes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS20240005252A1System and Method for Measuring Services Performance
Publication Date: 2024.01.04 LIGHTBOWN RICHARD
  • US20240005252A1 patent drawing
  • US20240005252A1 patent drawing
  • US20240005252A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A method for measuring service performance of a company. The company may be a human services company. A performance technology system is provided for facilitating the method. The performance technology system, operating on a services performance server, enables human service providers to measure every change of every client in service to accurately reflect service performance and changes in the rate of service impact from period to period. By helping public and non-profit human service agencies to manage the impact of their services with clients in real time, the performance technology system enables them to increase the supply of services with available funding, and assure taxpayers and donors of measurable value for their money.