An evaluation tool should help improve formal priority setting and resource allocation (PSRA) processes in Canada and elsewhere. These are crucial to maximizing value from limited resources.
Methods
On the basis of case studies, balanced scorecard development protocols and use-focused evaluation principles, an evaluation tool was developed based on an existing framework for high PSRA performance and implemented in two health care organizations in British Columbia, Canada.
Results
Implementation of the tool identified areas of strength, improvement and weakness in the pilot organizations’ processes for PSRA including: communication, staff engagement and culture. Refinements were identified and incorporated into the tool for future application.
Conclusion
This is the first documented multi-site application of such an evaluation tool. Broader dissemination should have use both in further refining the basis of the tool and in catalysing improved performance of PSRA practice.
WilliamsIDickinsonHRobinsonS. Rationing in health care: the theory and practice of priority setting, Bristol; Chicago: Policy Press, 2012.
2.
DonaldsonCMittonC. Priority setting toolkit: guide to the use of economics in healthcare decision making, London: BMJ Publishing Group, 2004.
3.
KleinR. Rationing in the fiscal ice age. Health Econ Policy Law2010; 5: 389–396.
4.
ApplebyJ. The credit crisis and health care. BMJ2008; 337: a2259–a2259.
5.
SmithNMittonCBryanS. Decision maker perceptions of resource allocation processes in Canadian health care organizations: a national survey. BMC Health Serv Res2013; 13: 247–247.
6.
GibsonJMittonCDuBois-WingG. Priority setting in Ontario’s LHINs: ethics and economics in action. Healthc Q Tor Ont2011; 14: 35–43.
7.
SibbaldSLGibsonJLSingerPA. Evaluating priority setting success in healthcare: a pilot study. BMC Health Serv Res2010; 10: 131–131.
8.
Peacock S. An evaluation of program budgeting and marginal analysis applied in South Australian hospitals. Melbourne Center for Health Program Evaluation, Monash University, 1998.
9.
Smith N. High performance in healthcare priority setting and resource allocation: key elements (manuscript under review).
10.
MittonCDionneFDonaldsonC. Managing healthcare budgets in times of austerity: the role of program budgeting and marginal analysis. Appl Health Econ Health Policy2014; 12: 95–102.
11.
DanielsN. Accountability for reasonableness: establishing a fair process for priority setting is easier than agreeing on principles. BMJ2000; 321: 1300–1301.
12.
PeacockSMittonCBateA. Overcoming barriers to priority setting using interdisciplinary methods. Health Policy2009; 92: 124–132.
13.
KershawRKershawS. Developing a BALANCED SCORECARD to Implement Strategy at St. Elsewhere Hospital. Manag Account Q2001; 2: 28–35.
14.
BakerGRPinkGH. A balanced scorecard for Canadian Hospitals. Healthc Manage Forum1995; 8: 7–13.
CassellCSymonG. Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research, London; Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2004.
23.
HolstiOR. Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publ. Co., 1969.
24.
ReelederDGoelVSingerPA. Leadership and priority setting: the perspective of hospital CEOs. Health Policy Amst Neth2006; 79: 24–34.
25.
TengFMittonCMacKenzieJ. Priority setting in the provincial health services authority: survey of key decision makers. BMC Health Serv Res2007; 7: 84–84.
26.
RobinsonSWilliamsIDickinsonH. Priority-setting and rationing in healthcare: evidence from the English experience. Soc Sci Med2012; 75: 2386–2393.
27.
DionneFMittonCSmithN. Decision maker views on priority setting in the Vancouver Island Health Authority. Cost Eff Resour Alloc CE2008; 6: 13–13.
PeacockSJMittonCRutaD. Priority setting in healthcare: towards guidelines for the program budgeting and marginal analysis framework. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res2010; 10: 539–552.
