Metric aspect: Quality assurance - Measuring service quality

King's College London, Alan Fricker

Metric definition

GMC Survey scores against Access to Educational Resources and sub questions on Library Services, Online Journals and Space for Private Study. Overall score, specialty outliers, positive versus negative satisfaction ratings.

Why is it important?

  • Key score for Medical Education in Trust
  • High quality national data with good granularity from a core user group (can look at Trust, Site and Specialty).
  • Very high participation rate. Consistent year on year application.
  • Not Library delivered reducing bias.
  • LQAF sections 1.2e Service development informed by evidence / 1.3c Positive impact

Process for compiling the metric

Data from GMC Survey site - http://www.gmc-uk.org/education/surveys.asp 

  • Overall score for Trust for Access to Educational Resources from Summary page.
  • Download scores for individual sub questions (click through the overall Access to the Educational Resources Score)
    • site by site data available but some question marks over accuracy of coding to sites.
    • Specialty data for outliers should be examined
    • Sentiment analysis by calculating (Very good + Good) – (Very Poor + poor) = sentiment score

What does it mean?

  • Compare performance on different measures year on year
  • Compare shifts within specialties that have been targeted following red flags in previous years
  • Compare sites for local issues
  • Benchmark against equivalent organisations
  • Be aware of wider issues within Trust / Specialties that may have negative halo

Desired outcomes

  • Have useful conversation with Medical Education
  • Zero red flags for specialties
  • Improve absolute performance
  • Improve performance against benchmark Trusts

Improvement plans

Subject to areas highlighted and research on benchmark services

Reporting

Results included in annual report. Annual GMS Survey Report prepared for each Trust and discussed at Library User Boards. Annual benchmarking report prepared for Library Leadership Team / wider Library Services

Next review due: 15 June 2021