The California Adult Performance Outcome Survey: preliminary evidence on reliability and validity

Abstract

Recent legislation in California mandated the development of an outcome measure suitable for measuring changes in quality of life associated with treatment in the public mental health system. The measure, known as the California Adult Performance Outcome Survey (CAPOS), relies on clinician and client reports of objective and subjective indicators of quality of life. The present study sought to determine whether the clinician-administered CAPOS would agree with that administered by trained research assistants, and whether the CAPOS would agree with an established quality of life measure. A sample of sixty-four severely mentally ill subjects were assessed by their regular mental health provider using the CAPOS. One week later they were assessed by a trained research assistant using the CAPOS and Lehman's Quality of Life Interview (QOLI). For most outcome domains, the CAPOS exhibited moderate to excellent agreement across occasions and raters. Correlations with the QOLI indicated a good degree of overlap among corresponding domains. Outcome measurement procedures for routine use in clinical settings are in their infancy. The CAPOS appears promising in this role because of its brevity, ease of administration, and adequate interrater reliability. The CAPOS affords state and local mental health authorities with an efficient means of tracking key quality of life indicators within the public mental health system.