Abstract
Periodically data envelopment analysis (DEA) is conducted on values that include estimated proportions, such as defect, satisfaction, mortality, or adverse event rates computed from samples. This occurs frequently in healthcare and public sector analysis where proportions frequently are estimated from partial samples. These estimates can produce statistically biased and variable estimates of DEA results, even as sample sizes become fairly large. This paper discusses several approaches to these problems, including Monte Carlo (MC), bootstrapping, chance constrained, and optimistic/pessimistic DEA methods. The performance of each method was compared using previously published data for fourteen Florida juvenile delinquency programs whose two of three inputs and one output were proportions. The impact of sample size and number of estimated rates also were investigated. In most cases, no statistically significant differences were found between the true DEA scores and the midpoints of optimistic/pessimistic, MC, and bootstrap intervals, the latter two after bias correction. True DEA results are strongly correlated with those produced by the MC (r=0.9865, p<0.001), chance constraint (r=0.9536,p<0.001), bootstrapping (r=0.9368,p<0.001), and optimistic/pessimistic (r=0.6799,p<0.001) approaches. While all methods perform fairly well, the MC approach tends to produce slightly better results and be fairly easy to implement.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Beasley, J. E. (1990). Comparing university departments. Omega, 18(2), 171–183.
Benneyan, J. C., Sunnetci, A., & Ceyhan, M. E. (2008). Data envelopment analysis models for identifying and benchmarking the best healthcare processes. International Journal of Six Sigma and Competitive Advantage, 4(3), 305–331.
Boame, A. K. (2004). The technical efficiency of Canadian urban transit systems. Transportation Research. Part E, Logistics and Transportation Review, 40(5), 401–416.
Bolstad, W. M. (2007). Introduction to Bayesian statistics. Hoboken: Wiley.
Box, G. E. P., & Tiao, G. C. (1992). Bayesian inference in statistical analysis. New York: Wiley.
Ceyhan, M. E. (2010). Proportional estimates and longitudinal targets in data envelopment analysis (DEA). Ph.D. dissertation, Northeastern University, United States, MA. Retrieved May 15, 2011, from Dissertations & Theses: Full Text. (Publication No. AAT 3443851).
Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1959). Chance constrained programming. Management Science, 6(1), 73–79.
Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2, 429–444.
Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1981). Evaluating program and managerial efficiency—An application of data envelopment analysis to program follow through. Management Science, 27(6), 668–697.
Chovanec, P. (2005). Production possibility frontier and stochastic programming. In 14th annual conference of doctoral students 2005 (pp. 108–113). Prague.
Cook, W. D., & Zhu, J. (2005). Modeling performance measurement: Applications and implementation issues in DEA. New York: Springer.
Cooper, W. W., Huang, Z. M., Lelas, V., Li, S. X., & Olesen, O. B. (1998). Chance constrained programming formulations for stochastic characterizations of efficiency and dominance in DEA. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 9, 53–79.
Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L., & Tone, K. (2000). Data envelopment analysis: A comprehensive text with models, applications, reference and DEA-solver software. Boston: Kluwer Academic.
Cooper, W. W., Huang, Z. M., & Li, S. X. (2004). Chance constrained DEA. In Handbook on data envelopment analysis. Boston: Kluwer Academic.
Coppola, M. N., Ozcan, Y. A., & Bogacki, R. (2003). Evaluation of performance of dental providers on posterior restorations: Does experience matter? A data envelopment analysis (DEA) approach. Journal of Medical Systems, 27(5), 445–456.
Desai, A., Ratick, S. J., & Schinnar, A. P. (2005). Data envelopment analysis with stochastic variations in data. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 39(2), 147–164.
Entani, T., Maeda, Y., & Tanaka, H. (2002). Dual models of interval DEA and its extension to interval data. European Journal of Operational Research, 136(1), 32–45.
Ferrier, G. D., & Hirschberg, J. G. (1997). Bootstrapping confidence intervals for linear programming efficiency scores: With an illustration using Italian bank data. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 8, 19–33.
Fried, H. O., Lambrinos, J., & Tyner, J. (2004). Evaluating the performance of professional golfers on the PGA, LPGA and SPGA tours. European Journal of Operational Research, 154(2), 548–561.
Kao, C., & Liu, S.-T. (2009). Stochastic data envelopment analysis in measuring the efficiency of Taiwan commercial banks. European Journal of Operational Research, 196, 312–322.
Law, A. M., & Kelton, W. D. (2000). Simulation modeling and analysis. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Lynch, S. M. (2007). Introduction to applied Bayesian statistics and estimation for social scientists. New York: Springer.
Morita, H., & Seiford, L. (1999). Characteristics on stochastic DEA efficiency. Journal of the Operations Research Society of Japan, 42, 389–404.
Press, S. J. (2003). Subjective and objective Bayesian statistics: principles, models, and applications. Hoboken: Wiley-Interscience.
Shafer, S. M., & Bradford, J. W. (1995). Efficiency measurement of alternative machine component grouping solutions via data envelopment analysis. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 42(2), 159–165.
Simar, L., & Wilson, P. W. (1998). How to bootstrap DEA estimators: A Monte Carlo comparison. Management Science, 44(1), 49–61.
Tollett, T. (1987). Comparative study of Florida delinquency commitment programs. State of Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services.
Wang, Y.-M., Greatbanks, R., & Yang, J.-B. (2005). Interval efficiency assessment using data envelopment analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 153(3), 347–370.
Winkler, R. L. (2003). An introduction to Bayesian inference and decision. Gainesville: Probabilistic Publishing.
Wong, W. P., Jaruphongsa, W., & Lee, L. H. (2008). Supply chain performance measurement system: a Monte Carlo DEA-based approach. International Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering, 3(2), 162–188.
Zhu, J. (2001). Multidimensional quality-of-life measure with an application to Fortune’s best cities. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 35(4), 263–284.
Zhu, J. (2003). Quantitative models for performance evaluation and benchmarking: Data envelopment analysis with spreadsheets and DEA Excel Solver. New York: Springer.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ceyhan, M.E., Benneyan, J.C. Handling estimated proportions in public sector data envelopment analysis. Ann Oper Res 221, 107–132 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-011-1007-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-011-1007-z