This article explores how three evaluation systems in eldercare governance, two national and one local, operate and interact at the municipal, administrative, and service levels in a Swedish municipality. The case study focuses on the three systems’ contributions to accountability and to improving eldercare quality. It is based on multiple sources, including 28 interviews with local key actors involved in local eldercare governance, and the results derive from a directed content analysis guided by four research questions.

The study demonstrates that the three evaluation systems support accountability and quality improvement in different ways and have different consequences for local actors. The systems create multiple accountability problems and have multiple constitutive effects, for example, creating different notions of what quality in eldercare means. The systems’ contributions to improving eldercare quality differed: the net effect of the two national systems was negative, whereas the local system has helped improve eldercare quality without any identified negative effects so far.

The article broadens our theoretical understanding and knowledge of regulatory mechanisms in eldercare governance. It has significance for eldercare policy by finding that policymakers and service providers must be aware of and manage multiple evaluation systems and accountability problems. Its implication for eldercare practice is that local actors must build evaluation capacity to manage existing evaluation systems in order to improve their own practices.