Read: HIV Help-Inc., a non-profit organization focusing on the prevention of HIV/AIDS just received a $10 million grant to fund several projects.  The organization is currently located in an older building that needs extensive repairs. The organization is using outdated office equipment In addition, one additional staff member is needed in order to keep up with incoming phone calls and requests for presentations and community outreach activities. A portion of the grant – $2 million – is allotted for business improvements which can address one of these three areas: repairs to building, outdated office equipment, and more staff. The remaining $8 million is to be used to further enhance the continuum of care level to provide access to preventive health services.

·  Write Section A: Create a cost benefit analysis for an update that will improve the business: structural, office equipment, or staff. You can be creative in determining what the business needs.  The cost will use the full amount of funds allotted to this improvement ($2 Million), so you can only improve one of these three needs

Note: Your work must include Steps 1-4, as outlined in section CH 7.2 attached

·  Write Section B: Create a cost effective analysis to determine how to best spend the $8 million portion of the grant funding on education and other preventive services. 

Read: The organization currently serves the community and clientele with community education classes at schools and community centers, as well as the distribution of condoms and educational materials. They wish to expand their current services to reach the neighboring community (4,000 residents), add social media advertising and messaging to reach the younger population, distribute educational material and condoms to homeless shelters in the area, and add HIV testing to at-risk individuals. Select two of the potential services and determine how the money can be best spent to have the greatest outcome for the HIV+ population in the community.

Note: Your work must address the costs as well as the anticipated benefits, as outlined in section CH 7.2 attached

·  Write Section C: Based on the  

CDC website (Links to an external site.)

, analyze how cultural norms impact the risk of getting HIV.  Explain one method or action on how to address this challenge.

Your initial contribution should be 250 to 300 words in length

Due 2/13/20 @9am Eastern w/plag report

7

Evaluating the Cost of Care

Learning Objectives

After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• Identify the factors that determine the true cost of care.

• Identify the direct and indirect costs of health care.

• Examine the concept of cost-benefit analysis related to the evaluation of a health care
program.

• Examine the concept of cost-effectiveness analysis related to the evaluation of a health
care program.

• Recognize programs that pass and fail cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis.

• Apply cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis to health care programs.

Courtesy of Keith Brofsky/Thinkstock

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 195 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7

Self-Check

Answer the following questions to the best of your ability.

1. How might one organization measure costs?
a. by the number of patients seen
b. by counting every penny in the facility
c. by estimating the reimbursement amount from Medicare/Medicaid
d. by adding up the cost of every piece of medical equipment

Critical Thinking

Throughout this text, various statistics have been presented and discussed. For example, in Chapter 6,
you read that “Many women with incomes below 200% of the federal poverty level report not seeking
health care due to an inability to take off work during clinic hours.” Statistical data is gathered through
various resources, one of which might be the electronic health records mentioned in previous chapters.
Do you think that true costs can be better evaluated with this tool?

Introduction

Introduction
Comparing data across studies and across orga-
nizations and programs is difficult because
each one measures information differently. For
example, one medical provider might measure
services by the number of patients seen, whereas
another might measure each billable procedure
regardless of the number of patients seen. How
do we determine which organization best uses
its resources?

First, we must determine what the true cost of
care is. For this, we need information on the cost
of supplies per service, the cost of physicians and
staff needed for a procedure, and the facility’s
cost per procedure. Once this data is tallied to
find a total cost of care, the data must be analyzed
to determine whether the money and resources
were well spent. By doing so, decision makers
can make informed selections regarding which
services to continue and which ones to revise or
discontinue. Courtesy of Jochen Sand/Thinkstock

The expenses of several resources,
including health care personnel,
supplies, and facility, must be taken into
consideration when calculating the true
cost of a medical procedure.

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 196 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7Section

7.1 Totaling the Cost of Care

2. Which of the following should be assessed to determine the true cost of care?
a. the cost of the valet service
b. the cost of paving the parking lot
c. the cost of physicians and staff for a single procedure
d. the cost of medical lobbyists

3. Why is it difficult to compare data across studies and across organizations and
programs?

a. Each measures information differently.
b. Different researchers look at different issues.
c. Employee satisfaction varies widely.
d. Medical certifications are not the same everywhere.

Answer Key

1. a 2. c 3. a

7.1 Totaling the Cost of Care

There are both measurable and abstract costs associated with any medical condi-tion. Measurable costs are the direct costs
of treatment, including the price of pharmaceuti-
cals and materials, such as bandages and sutures,
as well as the salaries of nurses, physicians, and
pharmacists. Direct costs can be measured by
totaling the financial prices of all of the resources
used to treat a patient. To a provider of a service,
these include costs related to property, plant, and
equipment. These costs are typically called “over-
head costs,” and the cost of direct care is typically
inflated to include these costs. If it is tangible, it is
a direct cost.

Indirect costs are more abstract. The indirect
costs of an illness, for example, include lost work
hours, reduced productivity, and reduced family
involvement and civil involvement. For a patient
with a mental condition, fees paid to a psychia-
trist are a direct cost; reduced work productivity
due to taking time off to see the psychiatrist is an
indirect cost. Both direct and indirect costs must
be weighed when determining resource alloca-
tion to care for vulnerable populations.

Courtesy of Comstock/Thinkstock

The cost of caring for a medical condition
includes the expense of tangible materials
as well as more abstract expenses caused
by diminished productivity at work, taking
sick days, and so forth.

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 197 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7Section 7.1 Totaling the Cost of Care

Vulnerable Mothers and Children

The United States experienced a record-breaking birthrate in 2007 of 4,316,233 total births.
The slight economic surge in 2006 and 2007, which preceded the Great Recession of 2008
and allayed fears over an impending recession, is a contributing factor to 2007’s elevated
birthrate, as people are more comfortable growing their families during times of economic
surplus. The U.S. population also reached an all-time high of 300 million people in late
2006, and the enlarged population added to the following inflated birthrate. The 2007
baby boom was followed by a steady decline in 2008 and 2009, partially due to the Great
Recession that began in late 2008. The birthrate declined 4% from 2007 to 4,131,019 total
births in 2009 (Sutton, Hamilton, & Mathews, 2011). The live birthrate further declined 3%
from 2009 to 4,000,279 in 2010 (Hamilton, Martin, & Ventura, 2011).

The good news is that the numbers of births to teen mothers and preterm births also
declined between 2007 and 2010. The birthrate to females ages 15–19 fell from 42.5 births
per 1,000 women in that age group in 2007 to 39.1 births per 1,000 women in that age
group in 2009 (Sutton et al., 2011). While the preterm birthrate rose 20% from 1990 to
2006, this upward trend reversed in 2007. The preterm birthrate for 2006 was 12.8% of all
live births; the rate fell to 12.7% in 2007, and again to 12.3% in 2008 (Martin, Osterman, &
Sutton, 2010). This decline is important, as preterm babies, low birth weight babies, and
babies born to teen mothers incur higher maternity, neonatal (just-born, generally consid-
ered to be the first day or two after birth), and postnatal (infancy after the first few days
postdelivery) medical costs than babies born at full gestation, at healthy birth weights,
and to more mature mothers.

In terms of direct costs, newborns with no medical complications such as prematurity or
low birth weight have an average postnatal care cost of $4,551 as of the year 2007. The
average cost of care for newborns with complications other than prematurity and low
birth weight is $10,273. The cost rises significantly to $49,033 for premature and low birth
weight babies. Of these costs, health insurers pay the bulk. Figure 7.1 illustrates the pay-
ment breakdown of expenses (March of Dimes, 2008).

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 198 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7Section 7.1 Totaling the Cost of Care

The cost of care for babies born premature or underweight is five times more than for other
complications and ten times more than for babies born with no complications.

March of Dimes. (2008). Retrieved from http://www.marchofdimes.com/peristats/pdfdocs/cts/ThomsonAnalysis2008_
SummaryDocument_final121208

As for maternal care, uncomplicated cesarean deliveries cost significantly more than
uncomplicated vaginal deliveries, at averages of $13,329 and $9,415, respectively. The total
average for all complicated deliveries, both vaginal and cesarean, is $14,667. Maternal care
costs include prenatal care and care for three months postpartum (March of Dimes, 2008).

The costs for maternal and infant care should also be considered together to get a clear
view of the total cost of having a baby. The average total cost of care for both mother and
child is estimated at $21,328. Uncomplicated pregnancies and deliveries average a mother
and infant total of $15,047, significantly lower than the overall average. The overall aver-
age is driven up by the total for premature and low birth weight cases, which average
$64,713 for both mother and child. Other complications are only slightly more expensive
than the overall average, at an average cost of $22,183. Figure 7.2 illustrates the break-
down of the total average costs for mother and infant care (March of Dimes, 2008).

Figure 7.1: Cost for maternal and infant care

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 199 11/26/12 2:50 PM

http://www.marchofdimes.com/peristats/pdfdocs/cts/ThomsonAnalysis2008_SummaryDocument_final121208

http://www.marchofdimes.com/peristats/pdfdocs/cts/ThomsonAnalysis2008_SummaryDocument_final121208

CHAPTER 7Section 7.1 Totaling the Cost of Care

Figure 7.2: Breakdown of the total average costs of maternal and infant care,
pregnancy through three months postpartum

Three months postpartum, the gap in expenses closes marginally for complicated, premature, and
uncomplicated births.

Source: March of Dimes

The indirect costs associated with birth include nonmaterial costs like time off work.
The average maternity leave from work in the United States is six weeks. Many working
mothers are not able to take more recovery time even for complicated pregnancies and
deliveries. When complications like preterm delivery and low birth weight arise, other
household members, such as grandparents and fathers, may need to take additional time
off work to help the mother. Time off work, whether paid or unpaid, means a loss in pro-
ductivity to employers. Exact numbers are difficult to estimate because productivity loss
is an indirect cost, but the total productivity cost loss to U.S. employers is estimated to be
around $260 billion per year due to all health-related work losses (Mitchell & Bates, 2011).

Abused Individuals

Nonfatal child abuse is estimated to cost the United States a total lifetime economic bur-
den of $124 billion, based on 2008 figures (Fang, Brown, Florence, & Mercy, 2012). The
lifetime cost estimate for each victim of nonfatal child abuse and neglect is $210,010. The
direct costs associated with this number include the following:

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 200 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7Section 7.1 Totaling the Cost of Care

• $7,999 for special education costs
• $7,728 in child welfare costs for programs such as Child Protective Services

(CPS)
• $6,747 in costs related to criminal justice
• $10,530 in abuse-related adulthood medical costs per victim
• $32,648 in abuse-related childhood medical costs per victim

The per-victim total also includes indirect costs associated with productivity loss of
$144,360 (Fang et al., 2012). Additional indirect costs associated with the effects of child
abuse on the adult victim’s ability to grow social capital in the form of strong relationships
are difficult to measure.

However, measuring the indirect cost of adult domestic partner abuse is easier. In 1995,
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated the annual indirect cost
of domestic partner abuse, including productivity loss, at nearly $1.8 billion. The direct
costs of domestic partner abuse are related to medical treatment for injuries, mental health
treatment, and criminal justice. The annual direct cost was estimated at nearly $4.1 bil-
lion. Accounting for inflation, the 1995 total estimated annual cost of $5.8 billion becomes
$8.3 billion in 2003 (Futures without Violence, 2010; National Center for Injury Prevention
and Control, 2003). This increase only reflects the loss in the value of U.S. currency, called
monetary inflation, and does not account for any changes in amount or severity of domes-
tic partner abuse. A lack of research on the direct and indirect costs of domestic partner
abuse makes it more difficult to know which programs are most effective and to allocate
resources accordingly.

According to Brown (2011), the National Center on Elder Abuse and the Administration
on Aging report spending at least $206.2 million in Social Services Block Grants funds and
$42.3 million in Medicaid funds that were allocated to Adult Protective Services (APS)
programs in fiscal year 2009. These funds, set up to assist the elderly with their medical
care, were spent on protecting them from their abusers instead (Brown, 2011).

Chronically Ill and Disabled Persons

The direct and indirect costs of chronic illnesses have a significant effect on the United
States’ economy and workforce. Focusing on the seven most common chronic ailments
offers a clear view of the problem without over or under inflating the numbers. In a study
by the Milken Institute (2007), the following are the seven most common and expensive
chronic ailments in the United States and their total annual treatment expenditures in
order of cost:

• stroke: $13.6 billion
• diabetes: $27.1 billion
• hypertension: $32.5 billion
• pulmonary disease: $45.2 billion
• mental disorders: $45.8 billion
• cancer: $48.1 billion
• heart disease: $64.7 billion

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 201 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7Section 7.1 Totaling the Cost of Care

The direct cost of treating these seven ailments for noninstitutionalized patients (those
who do not reside in prisons, long-term care facilities, specialized homes for mentally
unstable patients, and the like) is around $277 billion annually. (The costs of treating sec-
ondary conditions related to the seven conditions listed are not included in this figure.)
Furthermore, the direct and indirect costs associated with chronic disease are expected to
skyrocket in the coming decades. Figure 7.3 illustrates the estimated costs for 2023.

Figure 7.3: Forecast of direct and indirect costs associated with chronic disease

By 2023, it is expected to cost the nation more than twice as much to treat cancer compared to other
leading chronic diseases.

Milken Institute. (2007). Retrieved from http://www.milkeninstitute.org/healthreform/pdf/AnUnhealthyAmericaExecSumm

The indirect costs associated with lost productivity for individuals with chronic condi-
tions can be staggering. Absenteeism is the missing of days of work by employees. Work-
ers with chronic conditions also often experience presenteeism, where they show up for
work but have severely lowered productivity over a length of time. For example, a worker
with hypertension might arrive on time every day but feel sluggish and tired and so not
accomplish his or her best possible work output. The Milken Institute study indicates
that presenteeism creates significantly more output loss than absenteeism. Output loss is
not limited to chronic disease sufferers. Caregivers like spouses and adult children caring
for elderly parents also experience output loss due to the strains of caring for somebody
with a chronic disease. Overall, output loss due to chronic disease is estimated to cost the
country over $1 trillion annually (Milken Institute, 2007).

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 202 11/26/12 2:50 PM

http://www.milkeninstitute.org/healthreform/pdf/AnUnhealthyAmericaExecSumm

CHAPTER 7Section 7.1 Totaling the Cost of Care

It is important to remember that although chronic diseases are among the most expen-
sive health issues the country faces, the problem of chronic disease is potentially the area
with the most possibility of cost savings. Preventive medicine in terms of obesity control,
nutrition, immunizations, and smoking cessation creates an opportunity for a healthier
populace with fewer chronic conditions. It is estimated that improving lifestyle habits
now could save the country $1.1 trillion annually by 2023 (Milken Institute, 2007). Public
programs, like First Lady Michelle Obama’s “Let’s Move” campaign, work toward this
savings goal by educating and encouraging the public at large to improve our health by
improving our lifestyles.

Persons Diagnosed With HIV/AIDS

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimate that new cases of HIV
cost the United States and its territories a total of nearly $16.5 billion per year and that
the cost for a lifetime of HIV
treatment is $379,668 per per-
son (Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention, 2012d). Pre-
venting new cases of HIV is an
important part of the nation’s
health objectives, and the CDC
is tasked with monitoring HIV
prevention. Reducing the num-
ber of people with HIV/AIDS
not only creates a healthier citi-
zenry but it also saves the nation
a lot of money. To that end, the
CDC earmarked $359 million
annually for the years 2012–2016
to help fund HIV care and pre-
vention programs in state-run
health departments throughout
the nation. That number is sig-
nificantly increased from the
$111 million total that the CDC
used from 2007 to 2010 to fund
HIV testing, which was estimated to have created a savings of $1.2 billion in medical costs
during that same time (CDC, 2011b). The CDC estimates that every HIV infection that is
prevented saves the country $355,000 in lifetime medical costs per patient (CDC, 2010b).

Persons Diagnosed With Mental Conditions

Mental conditions impose a heavy financial burden on patients and the country in terms
of both direct and indirect costs. Mental health care costs are estimated to be as much as
6% of the nation’s total annual health care costs—an expenditure of about $57.5 billion
per year. Spending on mental health in America is tied with spending on cancer (National
Institute of Mental Health [NIMH], 2011). The CDC estimates that the direct cost of treat-
ing mental illness is closer to $100 billion annually (Reeves et al., 2011).

Courtesy of jcarillet/iStockphoto

When citizens are healthy, the nation saves a lot of money
that would have otherwise been used to fund the treatment of
acute and chronic illnesses, such as HIV/AIDS.

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 203 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7Section 7.1 Totaling the Cost of Care

The indirect costs associated with mental illness are much higher than the direct costs.
In addition to the $100 billion annual cost of care estimated by the CDC, mental illness is
estimated to cost the country $193 billion in lost wages and earnings due to absenteeism
and presenteeism. Add another $24 billion annually in disability benefits, and the indirect
costs are close to two and half times the annual direct cost (Reeves et al., 2011).

Suicide- and Homicide-Liable Persons

The indirect costs of suicide are estimated to be much higher than the direct costs associ-
ated with suicide. This is partially because most of the direct cost of suicide is actually a
direct cost of mental illness, like severe depression, and so is measured as mental illness,
not as suicide. The most recent estimates on the annual cost to the country of suicide puts
the direct cost around $1 billion and the indirect costs of lost productivity and wages,
as well as indirect costs to the remaining family, close to $32 billion (Crosby, Ortega, &
Stevens, 2011).

Homicides are quite a bit costlier. A study conducted at Iowa State University found that
the total for both direct and indirect costs of a single murder is $17.25 million. The study
estimates that every murderer costs the country $24 million (DeLisi et al., 2010). The direct
costs included in these figures include costs associated with the criminal justice system,
whereas the indirect costs include lost productivity of the criminal, the victim, and the
victim’s friends and relatives.

Persons Affected by Alcohol and Substance Abuse

The costs associated with alcohol and substance abuse are both health and socially ori-
ented. The overconsumption of alcohol alone is estimated to cost the country over $223.5
billion per year, a rate of nearly $1.90 for every alcoholic drink consumed. The major-

ity of the estimated cost, 72.2%,
is from indirect costs associated
with lost productivity. Only 11%
of the annual cost goes to health
care, and criminal justice costs
are a close third, at 9.4% of the
total. The government picks up
around 42.1% of the tab at $94.2
billion annually (Bouchery, Har-
wood, Sacks, Simon, & Brewer,
2011). Tobacco usage is another
costly health issue. According to
the CDC, tobacco use costs the
country $96 billion in tobacco-
related health care costs and
$97 billion in lost productivity
every year (CDC, 2012e). Drug
abuse costs the United States
$193 billion annually. This num-
ber includes both direct costs of

Courtesy of iStockphoto/Thinkstock

The nation loses almost $100 million every year because of
diminished productivity due to tobacco use.

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 204 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7Section 7.1 Totaling the Cost of Care

health care and criminal justice as well as indirect costs associated with productivity loss
and indirect costs of crime, such as emotional distress to the victims. Health costs contrib-
ute the smallest portion of the annual bill with productivity loss and crime costs account-
ing for the bulk (U.S. Department of Justice, National Drug Intelligence Center, 2011). The
scope of the economic effects of drug abuse is difficult to measure, and the health care
cost to individuals is significant. The cost for residential drug abuse treatment is approxi-
mately $29,240. Outpatient therapy is significantly less expensive, costing around $4,318
(U.S. Department of Justice, National Drug Intelligence Center, 2011).

Indigent and Homeless Persons

Tracking the cost of health care for America’s
homeless is as difficult as tracking the individu-
als themselves. Health care and homelessness are
tightly interwoven issues. On the one hand, many
homeless people do not have health insurance
and regular access to health care. On the other
hand, inflated health care costs can lead to bank-
ruptcy and other financial problems that can lead
to homelessness.

Homeless and indigent people have a high inci-
dence of emergency room visits, largely due to
a lack of access to other health care providers.
Although they may qualify for Medicaid, a great
number of qualifying individuals do not have
Medicaid coverage, due in part to difficulties in
applying for it, such as physical access to Medic-
aid offices, lack of photo ID, and lack of a street
address, to name a few. To address the health care
needs of America’s transient homeless popula-
tion, the federal government funds programs
through the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
and the Health Care for the Homeless (HCH) pro-
gram. The VA provides medical care and other
services for all veterans of the United States mili-
tary and funds special initiatives to address the
medical needs of homeless veterans. The HCH
provides primary and emergency health care as
well as mental health and substance abuse ser-
vices for America’s homeless. These and other government-funded programs, in addi-
tion to private organizations and agencies, health insurers, and out-of-pocket payments,
cover the cost of health care for the nation’s homeless. Though the total health care cost
of America’s homeless is difficult to ascertain, a study by the Lewin Group found that the
cost per homeless person per day in a hospital ranges from $1,200 to around $2,000 (Lewin
Group, 2004).

Courtesy of Monkey Business/Fotolia

Because the homeless lack access to many
health care providers, they visit emergency
rooms much more frequently.

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 205 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7Section 7.1 Totaling the Cost of Care

Critical Thinking

Consider the statement, “The usage gaps debunk the argument that immigrants, both documented and
undocumented, unduly drive up the cost of health care in America.” Think about immigration and its
relationship to health care costs. Do you agree with this statement? Why or why not?

Immigrants and Refugees

Overall, immigrants to the United States use fewer health care resources than native-born
citizens. This is due to a combination of access barriers, affordability, and cultural dif-
ferences. Even when comparing insured immigrants with insured natives, native-born
Americans use more—and more expensive—health care resources. The same is true when
comparing uninsured immigrants and refugees with uninsured natives. Uninsured immi-
grants use about 61% less health care than uninsured native-born citizens. Native-born
citizens of the United States use significantly more in quantity and more in quality health
care resources (Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy, 2006).

Overall, immigrants and refugees use health care at a rate of only 55% of that used by
native-born citizens. Sadly, the largest gap in health care use is among native and non-
native children. Native U.S. citizen children use upwards of 74% more health care resources
than do their immigrant peers (Mohanty et al., 2004). These gaps in health care use span
populations with public payer insurance, private payer insurance, and the uninsured.
More than the dollar amounts, the size of the usage gaps is important, as they inform
public policy regarding health care access in the United States. The usage gaps debunk the
argument that immigrants, both documented and undocumented, unduly drive up the
cost of health care in America.

Self-Check
Answer the following questions to the best of your ability.

1. The total cost of health-related productivity loss to U.S. employers is estimated at
___________ per year.

a. $260 billion
b. $290 billion
c. $320 billion
d. $370 billion

2. According to the text, who else suffers from job output loss but is not a chronic
disease sufferer?

a. employers
b. insurance providers
c. non-professional caregivers
d. health providers

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 206 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7Section

7.2 Analyzing the Cost of Care

3. The indirect costs of what special population are close to two and half times the
annual direct cost?

a. people diagnosed with mental conditions
b. the elderly
c. nonviolent abuse victims
d. HIV/AIDS patients

Answer Key
1. a 2. c 3. a
7.2 Analyzing the Cost of Care

Decision makers use economic tools to analyze the financial and social costs associ-ated with caring for the vulnerable. A cost-benefit analysis (CBA) assigns mon-etary value, or dollar total, to both direct and indirect costs, then compares the
costs and benefits of a project to determine the likelihood of the project producing a posi-
tive outcome and a good return on the financial investments of the project. The difficult
part of cost-benefit analysis is assigning monetary value to abstract social costs. Here is
a simplified example of a cost-benefit analysis for a program that would provide free
immunizations to schoolchildren:

Step 1: Assign monetary value to both direct and indirect costs.

Direct costs:

Trained staff ($1,000 for one day)

Syringes ($0.50 per child 3 300 children 5 $150)

Vaccinations ($5 per child 3 300 children 5 $1,500)

Alcohol pads ($0.10 per child 3 300 children 5 $30)

Bandages ($0.10 per child 3 300 children 5 $30)

Total direct costs: $2,710

Indirect costs:

Missed classroom time (cost to run the school for one day 5 $5,000)

Total indirect costs: $5,000

Step 2: Determine the expected benefit of the program.

Children who have received the vaccine are less likely to miss school due to illness
(this reduces the resources needed to catch children up on missed schoolwork).

Teachers are less likely to catch illness from the vaccinated children and so are less
likely to miss work (cost per missed day of work 5 $200 per teacher, per missed

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 207 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7Section 7.2 Analyzing the Cost of Care

day). If the program lowers the average number of missed days from three to two,
the financial benefit of fewer missed work days is $12,000:

3 missed days 3 $200 per day 3 60 teachers in the school 5 $36,000

2 missed days 3 $200 per day 3 60 teachers in the school 5 $24,000

Step 3: Compare the costs and benefits.

Total of direct and indirect costs 5 $7,710

Monetary value assigned to anticipated benefit 5 $12,000

Total savings caused by the immunization program 5 $4,290

Step 4: Make a decision.

The program provides a positive return on investment, both in financial terms and
in terms of the school population’s health.

Cost-benefit analysis focuses on the value of one program. Conversely, cost-effectiveness
analysis (CEA) is a method of comparing two or more programs. Unlike cost-benefit anal-
ysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, when used correctly, assigns both monetary value and
social value to program outcomes. With CEA, finances are not the only determinant of a
program’s value. For example:

Smoking prevention program for teenagers:

• cost to run program: $5,000
• anticipated percentage of students who will not smoke (based on available

research of this program or similar ones): 75%

Smoking cessation program for adults:

• cost to run program: $2,000
• anticipated percentage of program participants who remain nonsmokers after

leaving the program (based on available research of this program or similar
ones): 20%

Now consider the cost of caring for a long-term smoker who may present with emphy-
sema, heart disease, or cancer. Although the smoking prevention program may initially
cost more, CEA indicates that it offers better return on the financial and social investment.

Cost-effectiveness can also be expressed using a mathematical formula:

CE ratio =
Cost new program 2 Cost current program

Oucome new program 2 Outcome current program

The mathematical formula does not put as much weight on social value as does the listing
method.

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 208 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7Section 7.2 Analyzing the Cost of Care

Even with cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis to normalize data across
programs and organizations, it is still challenging to make comparisons necessary to
determine resource allocation. This is partly due to the lack of standardized data reporting
techniques and a general lack of research on the cost analysis of many programs. This is
especially true of programs that care for certain vulnerable populations, as we will discuss
in the next few sections.

Vulnerable Mothers and Children

Family planning services offer a cost-effective way to reduce health care costs associated with
vulnerable mothers and children. In 2008, an estimated 36 million women needed family

planning services. Of those, 17.4 mil-
lion were in need of publicly funded
access to contraceptives and family
planning–related services, includ-
ing prevention-oriented education.
In 2010, public expenditures for
family planning materials and ser-
vices were $2.37 billion, of which
75% came from Medicaid (Guttm-
acher Institute, 2012).

That might sound like a lot to spend
on contraceptives and counseling,
but the estimated savings gener-
ated by the expenditures on family
planning services are significantly
higher. For the $2.37 billion spent
on family planning, it is estimated
that federal and state governments
together save $5.1 billion per year.
Broken down, that amounts to $3.74
in Medicaid savings for every $1
spent on family planning (Guttm-

acher Institute, 2012). These savings are based on the cost of prenatal and postnatal care
for mothers and infants. Considering the incidence rate of babies with low birth weight
and other health issues among America’s youngest and poorest mothers, preventing a
pregnancy at the cost of contraception and counseling given at annual doctor appoint-
ments is significantly less than the cost of neonatal care for an infant in distress.

Abused Individuals

Cost analysis of abuse prevention is complicated by the difficulty in reaching victims and
potential victims and by the challenge of estimating the indirect costs associated with
abuse. Additionally, it is difficult to estimate the economic benefits of abuse prevention,
particularly educationally based prevention programs. Consider a prevention program
for teenage girls. A school may spend $500 on educating young women as to how to avoid
abusive relationships, but tracking those students 10 years later and verifying whether or

Courtesy of Katie Little/Fotolia

The public expenditures for family planning materials pale
in comparison to the cost of pre- and postnatal care for
America’s youngest and poorest mothers.

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 209 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7Section 7.2 Analyzing the Cost of Care

not they ever found themselves in a situation to avoid an abusive relationship presents a
significant challenge. Then there is the human aspect to consider—if just one of those girls
uses what she was taught in the prevention program to avoid an abusive relationship, is
it worth the full cost of the program?

Violence prevention programs struggle to convince decision makers (particularly those
holding the purse strings) that violence prevention programs are cost effective (Browne-
Miller, 2008). When studying abuse prevention programs for cost-efficacy, the programs
tend to be separated into three separate categories:

• primary prevention programs that focus on public education and awareness
• secondary prevention programs that focus specifically on identified high-risk

groups, such as teen mothers and families affected by drug or alcohol abuse
• tertiary prevention programs that focus efforts on families that have already

experienced abuse

Of these, primary prevention is often considered to be most effective due to the human
cost savings of avoiding abuse altogether.

Cost-benefit analysis of different primary prevention programs produces varying results.
Overall, home-visiting programs that provide support and resource access to new moth-
ers have been found to create cost savings in four primary areas:

• increased maternal employment and productivity
• decreased reliance on the public welfare system
• decreased spending on health care and related services
• decreased intervention by the criminal justice system

Using these four points as a guideline, most home-visiting programs create a cost sav-
ings of $5.70 for every prevention dollar spent on high-risk groups, and savings of $1.26
for every prevention dollar spent on low-risk groups. However, two national programs
were found to lose money. Healthy Families America, which provides various resources
to expectant and new mothers, shows a loss of 4.8 cents for every program dollar spent.
Similarly, Early Head Start, which works to improve family functioning and positive
health outcomes, loses 7.7 cents for every dollar spent (Howard & Brooks-Gunn, 2009).
These programs continue to receive funding due to the question of the human cost.

Chronically Ill and Disabled Persons

There is a movement toward creating cost savings by increasing the amount of home-
based care, as opposed to clinic and residential-based care, for chronically ill and dis-
abled people. Home-based care programs involve a team of doctors and nurses who
engage and support the patients in seeking their own positive health outcomes. These
programs have the most promise of increasing wellness among this population while
reducing their total cost of care.

Cost analysis of the Johns Hopkins Guided Care model, an integrated system of care that
trains nurses in primary care settings to manage care coordination for high-risk patients

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 210 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7Section 7.2 Analyzing the Cost of Care

with chronic illnesses or disabili-
ties, indicates that integrated care
approaches offer significant savings.
Data on the Guided Care program
shows that patients enrolled in the
program experienced 21% fewer hos-
pital readmissions, which translates
to significant financial savings (Hola-
han, Schoen, & McMorrow, 2011).

Equally promising is data from the
Intermountain Healthcare Primary
Care Medical Home (PCMH) model,
which focuses on high-risk elderly
patients. In addition to nurse care
managers, PCMH uses electronic
health records to streamline coordi-
nation of care. A two-year study of
the PCMH model found that it cre-
ated a total hospitalization reduc-
tion of 10% (Holahan et al., 2011).
Both examples offer encouraging evidence in favor of managed care models that engage
patients, take advantage of technology, and use trained nurses to provide a higher level of
patient care coordination.

Persons Diagnosed With HIV/AIDS

Cost analysis of HIV/AIDS testing and treatment programs should include consideration
for indirect human cost of quality of life in addition to expanded life expectancy and
direct costs. The CDC considers a treatment program cost effective if the cost per quality-
adjusted life year (QALY), an outcome measure that weighs both the quality and quantity
of life, is at or below $100,000 per QALY gained.

Determining the cost-efficacy of HIV prevention programs relies on informed estimates as
to the number of new infections that likely would have occurred in a set period. Consid-
ering that number with the cost of treatment provides a view of the cost-efficacy of pre-
vention programs in the United States. The CDC reports that HIV prevention programs
prevented an estimated 361,878 new HIV infections from 1991 to 2006. That translates to a
savings of $129.9 billion during that same period (CDC, 2012d).

Persons Diagnosed With Mental Conditions

Much of what is spent on mental conditions in the United States is on social services and
in the criminal justice system. In 2002, then Chair of the President’s New Freedom Com-
mission on Mental Health, Dr. Michael Hogan, commented, “We are spending too much
on mental illness in all the wrong places” (as cited in Insel, 2008). A decade later, his point
still stands in that most of the direct and indirect costs of mental illness are not directly

Courtesy of Getty Images/Thinkstock

Money that would otherwise be spent on clinic and
residential care could be saved by increasing home-based
care for chronically ill and disabled people.

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 211 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7Section 7.2 Analyzing the Cost of Care

related to health care for the individuals involved but are instead spent on items like pub-
lic income assistance (welfare) and in addressing homelessness (Insel, 2008).

Managed care models may hold the most hope for cost-effective reduction of the overall
cost of mental conditions. Improving the coordination of physical and mental health care
can reduce the likelihood of negative health outcomes. Mental health conditions often
present together with other issues, such as alcohol or drug dependence, a situation termed
mentally ill chemical abuse (MICA). Addressing multiple needs at the same time reduces
length and number of treatments sought. Though it is difficult to measure the direct and
especially the indirect costs of mental health issues, evidence suggests that improved pro-
grams within the health care system can reduce overall costs in terms of social services,
criminal justice, and productivity loss (National Institute of Mental Health [NIMH], 2009).

Suicide- and Homicide-Liable Persons

Violence prevention programs are most effective when disseminated through the school
system and other organizations that directly reach young people. Suicide and homicide
prevention are closely tied to mental health and substance abuse prevention. Among those
implemented in schools, the Signs of Suicide (SOS) program is perhaps most wide-
spread. SOS trains educators and program facilitators who then run the SOS program in
schools; the program teaches students how to recognize signs of suicide in themselves and
others and how to respond to suicide indicators (Signs of Suicide, 2012). Studies of the
SOS program have found it to be one of the most effective and cost-efficient suicide pre-
vention programs in the United States (Aseltine, James, Schilling, & Glanovsky, 2007).

Persons Affected by Alcohol
and Substance Abuse

Outpatient therapy is the most
popular treatment program for
alcohol and substance abuse. Out-
patient therapy is not only more
cost effective than residential
treatment but it also allows the
patient to maintain productivity
both at work and at home. Evi-
dence exists that outpatient thera-
pies can improve cost-efficacy by
combining multiple therapies that
address both physical and psy-
chological factors in a managed
care plan (Beaston-Blaakman,
Shepard, Horgan, & Ritter, 2007).

Courtesy of vm/iStockphoto

Alcohol and substance abuse are most often treated
through outpatient therapy, allowing the patient to preserve
productivity at home and at work.

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 212 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7Section 7.2 Analyzing the Cost of Care

Prevention programs are even more cost effective in that they lower the incidence rate of
alcohol and substance abuse. In doing so, prevention programs reduce the amount spent
on substance abuse treatments, emergency medical needs, and in the criminal justice sys-
tem. Substance abuse prevention programs aimed at youth have the dual effect of miti-
gating suicide and homicide rates. As such, many violence prevention programs have a
built-in substance abuse avoidance message.

Indigent and Homeless Persons

There are many great programs that address the different needs of the homeless popula-
tion. Some provide food, others provide shelter, and others provide medical care. The
exact work and goal of a program must be considered in a cost-benefit analysis of any
program serving homeless people. An organization providing multiple services under
one roof should consider each program separately in order to ascertain where funds are
best allocated.

Evidence supports the theory that critical time intervention programs that immediately
respond to the needs of homeless people with mental health conditions is cost effective in
that these programs reduce the number of shelterless nights per individual served (Jones
et al., 2003). Supported housing programs that integrate clinical care and sheltering have
also been found to be cost effective in serving homeless people with mental health con-
ditions. Although they are expensive to run, supported housing programs are found to
significantly reduce the number of shelterless nights (Rosenheck, Kasprow, Frisman, &
Liu-Mares, 2003).

Immigrants and Refugees

Health care access for noncitizen immigrants
and refugees continues to be a hot-button topic
in the United States. An argument can be made
that disqualifying immigrants from social welfare
programs such as Medicaid would save said pro-
grams billions of dollars. On the other hand, deny-
ing health care coverage and access to immigrants
creates a significant financial liability to care pro-
viders, as well as state and federal governments,
in the form of uninsured health care costs.

The long debate over the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act (PPACA) included voiced
concerns over allowing noncitizen immigrants
increased access to social welfare programs,
particularly Medicaid. The law was written to
offer lawfully present noncitizen immigrants the
same qualifying access to Medicaid as native-
born citizens; but the long-standing five-year
waiting period is still active under PPACA. The
law also includes lawfully present immigrants

Courtesy of Gerry Boughan/Shutterstock

Noncitizens and refugees continue to
campaign for affordable access to basic
health care.

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 213 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7Section 7.2 Analyzing the Cost of Care
Critical Thinking

Cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness both have different applications and uses. Can you think of
two ways each type of analysis might be used?

Self-Check
Answer the following questions to the best of your ability.

1. Cost analysis of abuse prevention is complicated by what difficulties?
a. reaching victims and potential victims
b. cost-effectiveness of the program
c. finding participants 10 years later
d. social stigma of victims of abuse

2. The CDC considers a treatment program cost effective if the cost per quality-
adjusted life year (QALY) is at or below _______ per QALY gained.

a. $50,000
b. $75,000
c. $100,000
d. $125,000

3. Prevention programs are more cost effective in that they lower the incidence rate
of what types of abuse?

a. alcohol and substance abuse
b. emotional abuse
c. verbal abuse
d. domestic partner abuse

Answer Key

1. a 2. c 3. a

(those who have immigrated through the proper channels) in the mandate to maintain
health insurance coverage and gives them equal access to the new health insurance mar-
ketplace developed under PPACA. Lawfully present immigrants are also eligible under
the other requirements for tax credits for health insurance premiums, as created by PPACA
(Siskin, 2010). Undocumented immigrants are exempted from the mandate and are also
denied access to the new insurance marketplace (Siskin, 2011).

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 214 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7

Chapter Summary

Case Study: The Argument Over Data Representation: Planned Parenthood Federation
of America

In 2011, Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) (2012) found itself in the middle of a debate
over the way medical service providers should collect and report data on services rendered. Amidst a
political firestorm over funding, PPFA released annual data on the total number of services, separated
by type, which the entire organization had rendered in 2010. PPFA claimed that the data showed that
abortion services accounted for 3% of the total number of services.

The data was questioned because it did not reflect the number of patients who received abortion services;
it reflected the total number of abortion services rendered. Concerns were also voiced that a patient seek-
ing abortion services received multiple services as part of the abortion services (counseling, pregnancy
tests, other medical tests, contraception, and breast exams, to name a few). The PPFA data counted each
service separately, instead of as a package with the abortion services. It was posited that abortion services
might account for significantly more than 3% of PPFA’s total business, were the data reported differently.

In the end, it was decided that there was no proof of data misrepresentation by PPFA. This is because PPFA
reports services data in accordance with Section 1001 of Title X of the Public Health Service Act. Title X is the
federal program under which many family planning resource centers, including PPFA, health departments,
and other community-based programs receive state and federal funding for reproductive health and family
planning services. Title X is administered by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of
Population Affairs (2011). Under the administrative guidelines, all participating organizations must count
services rendered and report data using the same definitions and data reporting practices. This allows the
administrative offices of Title X to provide standardized data that enables objective cost analysis and pro-
gram reviews that determine future funding to grantees under Title X. In this way, Title X has contributed
to standardized data reporting across all programs receiving government funds for family planning services.

Chapter Summary

The cost of medical care is more than what physicians charge to treat patients. Direct costs of care are tangible and include the cost of medication and treatment, includ-ing operational items such as staffing costs. Indirect costs of care include intangible
items that are more difficult to measure. Time off work, productivity loss at work and at
home, and quality of life are all indirect costs of care.

Treatment and prevention programs must prove that the money spent is worthwhile in order
to gain funding from grants, from donors, and from within the organizations themselves.
Cost analysis considers direct and indirect costs along with intended outcomes and actual
outcomes. The least expensive program may not actually offer the most cost-effective treat-
ment method. Many times, prevention programs are more cost efficient than treatment pro-
grams because preventing negative outcomes is usually less expensive than reversing them.

Critical Thinking

The chapter states that prevention is a better way to spend money than curing people after they have
contracted a disease or illness. Can you think of examples of certain health issues that would benefit
from this approach and how prevention can reduce the associated costs?

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 215 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7Self-Check

Self-Check
Answer the following questions to the best of your ability.

1. To determine how an organization should best use its resources, it must deter-
mine the true cost of health care.

a. True
b. False

2. For the purposes of this chapter, how are direct costs defined?
a. those costs associated with providing health care
b. how much a specific procedure costs
c. if it is tangible, it is a direct cost
d. by how much direct benefit a patient receives from the procedure

3. When determining resource allocation to care for vulnerable populations, what
must be considered? (Select two.)

a. patient benefits
b. direct costs
c. indirect costs
d. social approval

4. The United States experienced a record-breaking birthrate of 4,316,233 total births
in what year?

a. 1998
b. 2007
c. 2009
d. 2012

5. Primary prevention programs focus on what?
a. public education and awareness
b. social relationships
c. responsibility
d. peer pressure

6. Treatment and prevention programs must prove that the money spent is
____________ in order to gain funding from grants, from donors, and from
within the organizations themselves.

a. worthwhile
b. accessible
c. accounted for
d. placed in a strong financial institution

Answer Key

1. a 2. c 3. b, c 4. b 5. a 6. a

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 216 11/26/12 2:50 PM

CHAPTER 7

Web Exercise

Additional Resources

Visit the following websites to learn more about the topics covered in this chapter:

Patient Centered Medical Home, which advocates a continuum of care

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1466763/?tool=pmcentrez

The Signs of Suicide website

http://www.mentalhealthscreening.org/programs/youth-prevention-programs/sos/

The Office of Population Affairs website about Title X

http://www.hhs.gov/opa/title-x-family-planning/

Web Exercise

This chapter has discussed the unseen costs of health care services, including everything
from physicians’ salaries to the cost of medical supplies such as tongue depressors and
gloves. It has also discussed and given examples of cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness
analyses. Choose a position that is for or against the statement, “Is any program worth the
cost if only a single human being benefits from the program?” Research that position and
write a three- to five-page paper outlining your position. Be sure to use reliable sources
and cite them in APA format. Wikipedia and YouTube should not be used in this assign-
ment. Your paper must meet the following requirements:

• three to five pages, double-spaced
• 12-point Times New Roman font
• APA formatting for quotes, citations, and sources

In your paper, be sure to address the following:

• explanation of your position as for or against
• examples supporting your position
• why you chose those particular examples
• did you change your stance when researching and why?

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 217 11/26/12 2:50 PM

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1466763/?tool=pmcentrez

http://www.mentalhealthscreening.org/programs/youth-prevention-programs/sos/

http://www.hhs.gov/opa/title-x-family-planning/

CHAPTER 7

Key Terms

absenteeism The missing of days of work
by employees.

cost-benefit analysis (CBA) Determines
the likelihood of the project producing a
positive outcome and a good return on the
financial investments of the project.

cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) A
method of comparing two or more
programs.

direct costs Tangible costs that can be
measured by totaling the financial prices of
all of the resources used to treat a patient.

indirect costs Abstract costs that are dif-
ficult to measure in economic terms.

monetary inflation Loss in currency
value.

monetary value Cost in terms of a dollar
total.

neonatal Just-born, generally considered
to be the first day or two after birth.

postnatal Infancy after the first few days
postdelivery.

presenteeism Wherein workers show up
for work but have severely lowered pro-
ductivity over a length of time.

quality-adjusted life year (QALY) An
outcome measure that weighs both the
quality and quantity of life.

Signs of Suicide program A nationwide
program that trains educators and other
facilitators to educate youth on recogniz-
ing the signs and symptoms of suicide and
the appropriate ways to respond.

Key Terms

bur25613_07_c07_195-218.indd 218 11/26/12 2:50 PM