SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

REFERENCES

  • 1
    Moynihan DP. The Dynamics of Performance Management: Constructing Information and Reform. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
  • 2
    Landrum LB, Baker SL. Managing complex systems: performance management in public health. Public Health Manag Pract. 2004;10:13-18.
  • 3
    Heinrich CJ. Evidence-based policy and performance management: challenges and prospects in two parallel movements. Am Rev Public Adm. 2007;37:255-277.
  • 4
    Government Performance and Results Act of 1993. Public Law 103-162.
  • 5
    U.S. Government Accountability Office. OMB's PART reviews increased agencies' attention to improving evidence of program results. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-06-67; 2005.
  • 6
    Poister, TH. Measuring Performance in Public and Nonprofit Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2003.
  • 7
    Goddard M, Mannion R. The role of horizontal and vertical approaches to performance measurement and improvement in the U.K. public sector. Public Perform Manag Rev. 2004;28:75-95.
  • 8
    Jennings ET, Haist MP. Putting performance measurement in context. In: Ingraham PA, Lynn LE, eds. The Art of Governance: Analyzing Management and Administration. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press; 2004:173-194.
  • 9
    Frederickson DG, Frederickson GH. Measuring the Performance of the Hollow State. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press; 2006.
  • 10
    Mandell M, Keast R. Evaluating Network Arrangements: Toward Revised Performance Measures. Leuven, Belgium; 2006.
  • 11
    Radin BA. Challenging the Performance Movement. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press; 2006.
  • 12
    DeGroff, A. New public management and governance collide: federal-level performance measurement in networked public management environments. Dissertations Abstracts International (UMI No. 3376270); 2009.
  • 13
    U.S. General Accounting Office. Results-Oriented Government: GPRA has Established a Solid Foundation for Achieving Greater Results. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office, GAO-04-38, 2004.
  • 14
    Newcomer KE. Using performance measurement to improve programs. New Directions for Evaluation. 1997;75:5-14.
  • 15
    Wholey JS. Making results count in public and nonprofit organizations: balancing performance with other values. In: Newcomer K, Jennings ET, Broom C, Lomax A, eds. Meeting the Challenges of Performance Oriented Government. Washington, DC: American Society for Public Administration, Center for Accountability and Performance; 2002:13-36.
  • 16
    Henson RM, Wyatt SW, Lee NC. The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program: a comprehensive public health response to two major health issues for women. J Public Health Manag Pract. 1996:2:36-47.
  • 17
    Lee NC, Wong FL, Jamison PM, et al. Implementation of the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program: the beginning. Cancer. 2014;120(16 Suppl.):2540-2548.
  • 18
    National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program. 2010. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/nbccedp. Accessed November 19, 2010.
  • 19
    Yancy B, DeGroff A, Royalty J, Marroulis S, Mattingly C, Benard VB. Using data to effectively manage a national screening program. Cancer. 2014;120(16 Suppl.):2575-2583.
  • 20
    Teddlie C, Tashakkori A. Foundations of Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2009.
  • 21
    Liang KY, Zeger SL. Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika. 1986;73:13-22.
  • 22
    Agresti A. Categorical Data Analysis. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2002.
  • 23
    Diggle PJ, Heagerty P, Liang KY, Zeger SL. Analysis of Longitudinal Data, 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2002.
  • 24
    Patton MQ. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2002.
  • 25
    Charmaz K. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2006.
  • 26
    DeGroff A, Schooley M, Chapel T, Poister TH. Challenges and strategies in applying performance measurement to federal public health programs. Eval Program Plann. 2010;33:365-372.
  • 27
    Hatry HP. Performance Measurement: Getting Results. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press; 1999.
  • 28
    U.S. General Accounting Office. Managing for Results: Measuring Program Results That Are Under Limited Federal Control. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office, GAO/GGD-99-16; 1998.
  • 29
    Berman E, XiaoHu W. Performance measurement in U.S. counties: capacity for reform. Public Adm Rev. 2000;60:409-420.