Detection of Key Links in the Quality of Government Procurement of Home-based Senior Care Services Based on GERT Network

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1007-7375.2022.02.005

Abstract

Abstract: The key links that affect the quality of government procurement of home-based senior care services (GPHSCS) are explored. Taking Gulou district of Nanjing city as an example to construct the GERT network model of GPHSCS, the key node measure coefficients are proposed and the key nodes of GERT network identified through the numerical examples and numerical simulation, which are the key links that affect the quality of GPHSCS. The results show that supervision and evaluation, construction of supervision and evaluation system, and selection of contractors are the key links about quality of GPHSCS, and they have the greatest impact on the quality of senior care services. Improvement measures are put forward for key links, which can provide reference for solving quality problems of GPHSCS.

Key words: home-based senior care services, graphical evaluation review technique (GERT), key node measure coefficients

CLC Number:

F202

XU Lan, LIU Hongwei. Detection of Key Links in the Quality of Government Procurement of Home-based Senior Care Services Based on GERT Network[J]. Industrial Engineering Journal, 2022, 25(2): 34-41.

References

[1] 章晓懿, 刘帮成. 社区居家养老服务质量模型研究——以上海市为例[J]. 中国人口科学, 2011(3): 83-92,112.
ZHANG Xiaoyi, LIU Bangcheng. Service qualitative analysis of elderly homecare in community: a servqual-based structural model[Jl. Chinese Journal of Population Science, 2011(3): 83-92,112.
[2] 温海红, 王怡欢. 居家社区养老服务质量及其影响因素分析——基于陕西省三市调查数据[J]. 河北大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2019, 44(2): 139-148
WEN Haihong, WANG Yihuan. Quality and influencing factors of home-based community care service—based on survey data of three cities in Shaanxi[J]. Journal of Hebei University(Philosophy and Social Science), 2019, 44(2): 139-148
[3] 李玉玲. 我国养老服务质量建设的难点及治理研究[J]. 兰州学刊, 2020(2): 192-199
LI Yuling. Research on the difficulties and governance of the construction of service quality for the elderly in China[J]. Lanzhou Academic Journal, 2020(2): 192-199
[4] 韩清颖, 孙涛. 政府购买公共服务有效性及其影响因素研究——基于153个政府购买公共服务案例的探索[J]. 公共管理学报, 2019, 16(3): 62-72,171
HAN Qingying, SUN Tao. Research on the effectiveness and influencing factors of government purchasing public services—based on 153 cases of government purchasing public services[J]. Journal of Public Management, 2019, 16(3): 62-72,171
[5] 胡春艳, 李蕙娟. 政府购买居家养老服务的问责关系分析及建构——以湖南省为例[J]. 中国行政管理, 2015(11): 110-115
HU Chunyan, LI Huijuan. Analysis and construction of accountability relationships in government purchasing home-based care services[J]. Chinese Public Administration, 2015(11): 110-115
[6] 章晓懿, 梅强. 社区居家养老服务绩效评估指标体系研究[J]. 统计与决策, 2012(24): 73-75
[7] 郭本海, 陈玮, 吕东东. 基于GERT网络的战略性新兴产业技术瓶颈探测模型[J]. 系统管理学报, 2017, 26(4): 728-736
GUO Benhai, CHEN Wei, LYU Dongdong. A GERT network mode for detection of technology bottleneck in strategic emerging industry[J]. Journal of Systems & Management, 2017, 26(4): 728-736
[8] 王邦兆, 王欢, 郭本海. 区域知识创新价值流动GERT网络模型[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2015, 32(2): 39-44
WANG Bangzhao, WANG Huan, GUO Benhai. Regional knowledge innovation value-flow GERT network model[J]. Science & Technology Progress and Policy, 2015, 32(2): 39-44
[9] NELSON R G, AMIR A, SAMIN A. The use of a GERT based method to model concurrent product development processes[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2016, 250(2): 566-578
[10] JAYNES E T. Information theory and statistical mechanics[J]. Physical Review, 1957, 106(4): 620-630
[11] 曹颖赛, 刘思峰, 方志耕, 等. 基于案例学习的多层次聚类指标客观权重极大熵挖掘模型[J]. 中国管理科学, 2019, 27(2): 200-207
CAO Yingsai, LIU Sifeng, FANG Zhigeng, et al. An objective weight maximum entropy mining model for multi-level clustering indexes based on case learning[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2019, 27(2): 200-207
[12] 范炜烽, 祁静, 薛明蓉, 等. 政府购买公民社会组织居家养老服务研究—以南京市鼓楼区为例[J]. 科学决策, 2010(4): 19-30, 94
FAN Weifeng, QI Jing, XUE Mingrong, et al. Government purchases of public services from CSOs on the home-based aged -care services: a case of Gulou district in Nanjing[J]. Scientific Decision Making, 2010(4): 19-30, 94