1. People have trouble with the idea that a single piece of
data can play two roles (performance measure role: measuring the performance
of a program and indicator role: a proxy for population well-being). Try the
image of a famous actor playing two roles as a way to explain this.
2. These double roles are particularly important to those agencies (e.g. public health,
education, and the environment) where programs often serve most or all of the
population.
3. In prevention programs, some lower right
quadrant measures will be indicators of the prevalence of the condition to be
prevented in the general population.
Advice from:
Organizational Resources
References
The Short Answer
Indicators are about whole
populations.
Performance measures are about
client populations.
Indicators are usually aboutpeoples’ lives, whether or not they receive any service.
Performance measures are usually about people who receive service.
Indicators are proxies for the
well-being of whole populations, and necessarily matters of approximation and compromise.
Performance measures are about a known group of people who get service and
conditions for this group can often be accurately measured.
(1) Much of this answer to this question is addressed in the answer to 2.2.
Please read this first
(2) Why is this important? We have a long history of holding individual agencies
responsible for population well-being. No one agency, by itself can turn the
curve on any indicator. It is unfair and unproductive to hold a single agency
responsible. We need to reframe the way we talk about accountability for whole
population results and indicators. Rather than say: “The Health Department
is responsible for "all children being healthy.” We need to say “The Health
department is responsible for assembling a team of public and private partners
and creating a community strategy to make all children healthy.” The
difference here is not just phrasing. It is the difference between having one
agency to blame when things go wrong and accepting joint responsibility. It is
the difference between expecting the Health Department to do it all by itself,
and recognizing that this is not possible, that the contribution of many
partners will be required.
(3) The disciplined distinction between indicators and performance measures is a
new idea for many people. They are used to using the word “indicator”
interchangeably to describe population and program measures. Using language
discipline to distinguish them, indicators are measures which help quantify
the achievement of a result. Performance measures are measures of how well
public and private programs and agencies are working.
(4) Here are some differences:
The Difference between the Role of Indicators
and the Role of Performance Measures
Indicators are about whole
populations.
Performance measures are about
client populations.
Indicators are usually aboutpeoples’ lives, whether or not they receive any service.
Performance measures are usually about people who receive service.
Indicators are proxies for the
well-being of whole populations, and necessarily matters of approximation and compromise.
Performance measures are about a known group of people who get service and
conditions for this group can often be accurately measured.
