Publication Cover
Advances in Mental Health
Promotion, Prevention and Early Intervention
Volume 17, 2019 - Issue 2
408
Views
1
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

Outcome measurement in Australian non-government organisations: a descriptive study of recovery-based mental health workers’ experiences and beliefs

ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Pages 98-109 | Received 04 Oct 2017, Accepted 21 Jun 2018, Published online: 02 Jul 2018
 

ABSTRACT

Objective: This study aimed to explore and gain an understanding of Australian non-government mental health staff experiences of outcome measurement. The project sought to learn if non-clinical staff share key issues raised by clinical staff, what challenges are faced using outcome measurement in non-government settings, and how outcome measurement benefits practice.

Method: Individuals were recruited between 2016 and 2017 from recovery-oriented non-government organisations using outcome measurement practices. Utilising a phenomenological perspective, semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 12 participants. Service characteristics, recovery, and experiences of outcome measurement processes, feasibility, and tool properties were explored.

Results: Initial data provided context of employing organisations, the practicing philosophies, and outcome tools used by participants. Four thematic areas were identified from the analysis of participant transcripts, (i) the mixed views and beliefs about outcome measurement, (ii) the standing of tool validity, (iii) wide use of flexible practices and (iv) the value and importance of training and support.

Discussion: This non-comparative study found that non-clinical mental health staff shared some feasibility issues with clinical staff, however, they also presented new issues and new ways of using outcome measurement tools. Future research should continue to document non-government organisation staff experiences of outcome measurement to improve practice and culture.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Griffith University School of Human Services and Social Work Honours and Masters Financial Support, under the School of Human Services and Social Work Honours and Masters Financial Support (HSV1010).

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.