How to Administer the Performance Diagnostic Checklist-Human Services (PDC-HS)

Behavior analysts frequently encounter performance issues in human service settings. The Performance Diagnostic Checklist-Human Services (PDC-HS) is a structured tool designed to identify barriers to employee performance and guide intervention selection. However, research has shown inconsistencies in how the PDC-HS is administered, leading to challenges in interpretation and application.

In this post, we will break down:

• What the PDC-HS is and how it works
• Common issues in administering the checklist
• Best practices for ensuring accurate and useful results

By following evidence-based recommendations, behavior analysts can maximize the effectiveness of the PDC-HS and improve workplace performance.

---

What is the PDC-HS?

The Performance Diagnostic Checklist-Human Services (PDC-HS) is a tool used to assess the reasons behind performance deficits in human service environments. Developed as an extension of the original PDC, the PDC-HS is specifically tailored to settings such as hospitals, clinics, group homes, and educational facilities.

The checklist analyzes performance deficits across four key domains:

1. Training – Does the employee know how to perform the task correctly?
2. Task Clarification and Prompts – Are expectations clear, and do employees receive reminders when necessary?
3. Resources, Materials, and Processes – Are employees provided with the tools and materials needed to perform their job?
4. Performance Consequences, Effort, and Competition – Are reinforcement and feedback provided for correct performance, and is the effort required appropriately balanced with incentives?

The assessment is typically conducted using informant-based interviews with supervisors, employees, or other relevant personnel, supplemented by direct observation of task performance.

---

Common Issues in Administering the PDC-HS

While the PDC-HS is a valuable tool, studies have found inconsistencies in how it is administered (Goldman et al., 2024). These inconsistencies can impact the reliability of the findings and the effectiveness of selected interventions.

1. Lack of Standardization

Different administrators use different methods, leading to variability in results. Some of the most common inconsistencies include:

• Using different phrasing when asking checklist questions (verbatim vs. paraphrased).
• Providing respondents with a paper copy or requiring verbal responses only.
• Asking follow-up questions inconsistently, leading to varying levels of detail in responses.

2. Inconsistencies in Data Collection

The way responses are recorded and analyzed also varies across administrators. Common issues include:

• Different methods of summarizing findings (by individual, by group, or by domain).
• Lack of clarity on how intervention strategies are selected based on results.
• Limited training for administrators, leading to inconsistent scoring and interpretation.

3. Challenges with Direct Observation

Some studies reported variability in how direct observation is conducted. Differences include:

• The timing and duration of observations.
• Whether observations are conducted in natural settings or simulations.
• Levels of interaction between observers and employees during assessments.

These inconsistencies make it difficult to compare findings across studies and settings, reducing the overall utility of the PDC-HS.

---

Best Practices for Administering the PDC-HS

To improve the accuracy and reliability of the PDC-HS, behavior analysts should follow evidence-based guidelines.

Before Conducting the Checklist

To ensure a successful assessment, administrators should:

• Receive proper training on the PDC-HS (e.g., via Behavioral Skills Training – BST).
• Identify the appropriate respondent(s) (e.g., direct supervisors or frontline employees).
• Clarify the specific performance concern before starting the assessment.

During the Checklist Administration

To collect reliable data, the administrator should:

• Ask questions verbally using verbatim wording from the PDC-HS.
• Provide a paper or digital copy to respondents to enhance clarity.
• Use standardized follow-up questions to clarify responses.
• Conduct direct observation in the natural work environment to ensure real-world accuracy.

Analyzing and Applying Data

After completing the checklist, results should be analyzed methodically:

• Organize responses by domain, summarizing the percentage of “no” answers.
• Use findings to guide intervention selection, matching problems with appropriate solutions.
• Clearly document the methods used for future replication and reliability.

By standardizing data collection, analysis, and intervention selection, behavior analysts can improve the effectiveness of the PDC-HS in practice.

---

Conclusion

The PDC-HS is a valuable tool for diagnosing and addressing employee performance deficits in human services. However, inconsistencies in administration can undermine its effectiveness. By following standardized guidelines—including clear training, structured questioning, and systematic analysis—behavior analysts can ensure the PDC-HS yields accurate, reliable, and actionable results.

For more details on this topic, refer to the original research by Goldman et al. (2024) in Behavior Analysis in Practice:
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-023-00848-3.