Value For Money Assessment Research Articles

Value for Money Modeling for Scaling up Nature-Based Solutions for Improving Integrated Water Resources Management and Enhanced Water Security in Pakistan

This paper is about the Value for Money (VfM) analysis conducted for the Water Resource Accountability (WRAP) Project, which comprehensively evaluates the project’s economic efficiency, effectiveness, equity, and overall impact. The WRAP implements to undertake demonstrations of Nature-based Solutions (NbS), including Ecosystem-based Adaptation (EbA) interventions that will improve water security and governance, build resilience to climate change of communities at the target sites in Gilgit-Baltistan (GB) and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), and enable the government and relevant stakeholders to implement and replicate NbS in Pakistan for building climate change resilience. The Paper is based on primary and secondary data collected using a well-structured interview schedule, focus group discussion, and other verified reports. The excel-based model was used for analysis, and a step-by-step and structured framework was used to conduct a VfM assessment. VFM estimates showed a favorable BCR across various interventions, with standout results like the Gabion check weirs and protection bunds (Gabion Bund) intervention achieving an impressive BCR of 3.50. These findings reaffirm the project’s ability to deliver substantial benefits while efficiently utilizing resources, making it a prudent investment in water resource management and natur- based solutions. WRAP’s equity analysis promotes inclusivity and fairness, particularly among vulnerable populations. While the project made significant strides in involving women in water-efficient practices, there is room for enhancing inclusiveness for lower-income and disabled populations. Recommendations emphasize setting specified targets for various populace categories to bolster the project’s social impact further.

Addressing the elephant in the room: How do we understand value for money in transport Public Private Partnerships?

Value for Money (VfM) is often considered the criterion for assessing whether Public Private Partnerships (PPPs), or the traditional procurement should be adopted to deliver infrastructure projects and their services. Yet, this decision is mostly focussed on whichever approach that embodies a lower cost while neglecting the value it can bring to projects. Addressing this elephant in the room, a set of interviews with highly experienced professionals (with an average of 23-year working experience in infrastructure procurement) were conducted to engender an in-depth understanding of VfM. Through the lens of sensemaking, our results empirically demonstrated the duality of VfM in the context of transport projects instead of the previous foci on cost, time, and quality (i.e., traditional VfM), and further unearthed the nuances when considering them. As such, this research contributes to the PPP body of knowledge by providing a more meaningful concept of VfM. For practitioners and decision makers, it proposes a framework to benchmark their VfM assessments of infrastructure interventions.

Principles and methods to advance value for money

Value for money poses the question, “What is good resource use?” It is often answered with a narrow economic analysis that does not adequately address what diverse people value. We suggest new principles and methods that may help evaluators answer the question better. First, we define value for money, which sits at the intersection of evaluation and economics. Next, we make the case for a holistic assessment of value for money that evaluators can conduct with tools they already have, like rubrics. We introduce three principles that further align value for money with evaluation: value depends on the credibility of estimates; things do not have value, people place value on things; and people value the same things differently. Together, they suggest evaluators should arrive at multiple, possibly conflicting conclusions that represent diverse value perspectives. We demonstrate how this may be done using a value-for-money rubric to improve resource allocation for impact.

Value-for-money assessment of social spending in developing countries: lessons from Ethiopia

ABSTRACT This practice note combines key theoretical principles of value-for-money (VfM) assessment with the authors’ experiences of conducting these studies in the health and agriculture sectors in Ethiopia. It documents an innovative approach to VfM analysis in contexts where data is limited. The approach combines quantitative and qualitative methods, can be easily applied to policy-relevant questions, and is simple and easily reproducible in developing countries. This practice note is useful to policymakers interested in VfM assessments of social spending in developing countries.

VfM audit and the UK public sector: A critical review of the VfM reports

AbstractThe study investigates why the value for money (VfM) audit, in its current form, fails to capture the actual state of affairs in the UK public organizations. To address this, we utilize a VfM assessment matrix and key public sector performance indicators to critically evaluate the VfM reports published by two main public bodies in the United Kingdom, that is, the National Health Services and the police authorities, alongside the reports published by the National Audit Office and Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services. Our results reveal that the VfM reports do not clearly show how the 3Es (i.e., economy, efficiency, and effectiveness) associated with the VfM assessment are attained. There are also limited suggestions on the public bodies’ service output or social outcomes and how performance targets are fulfilled. We deduce that the VfM audit's failure to capture these elements significantly curtails the benefits of the VfM exercise to public bodies. We argue for complementing the current VfM assessment with a review of the performance of these bodies based on the services they offer as well as their strategic objectives.

Unpacking the context of value for money assessment in global markets: a procurement option framework for public-private partnerships

PurposeThe unprecedented SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic has further constrained the budgets of governments worldwide for delivering their much-needed infrastructure. Consequently, public-private partnerships (PPPs), with the private sector's investment and ingenuity, would appear to be an increasingly popular alternative. Value for money (VfM) has become the major criterion for evaluating PPPs against the traditional public sector procurement and, however, is plagued with controversy. Hence, it is important that governments compare and contrast their practice with similar and disparate bodies to engender best practice. This paper, therefore, aims to understand governments' assessment context and provide a cross-continental comparison of their VfM assessment.Design/methodology/approachFaced with different domestic contexts (e.g. aging infrastructure, population growth, and competing demands on finance), governments tend to place different emphases when undertaking the VfM assessment. In line with the theory of boundary spanning, a cross-continental comparison is conducted between three of the most noticeable PPP markets (i.e. the United Kingdom, Australia and China) about their VfM assessment. The institutional level is interpreted by a social, economic and political framework, and the methodological level is elucidated through a qualitative and quantitative VfM assessment.FindingsThere are individual institutional characteristics that have shaped the way each country assesses VfM. For the methodological level, we identify that: (1) these global markets use a public sector comparator as the benchmark in VfM assessment; (2) ambiguous qualitative assessment is conducted only against PPPs to strengthen their policy development; (3) Australia's priority is in service provision whereas that of the UK and China is project finance and production; and (4) all markets are seeking an amelioration of existing controversial VfM assessments so that purported VfM relates to project lifecycles. As such, an option framework is proposed to make headway towards a sensible selection of infrastructure procurement approaches in the post COVID-19 era.Originality/valueThis study addresses a current void of enhancing the decision-making process for using PPPs within today's changing environment and then opens up an avenue for future empirical research to examine the option framework and ensuing VfM decisions. Practically, it presents a holistic VfM landscape for public sector procurers that aim to engage with PPPs for their infrastructure interventions.

Value for money in transport infrastructure investment: An enhanced model for better procurement decisions

This paper addresses the nebulous value for money (VfM) concept and its widely-criticised use in justifying the adoption of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) for transport infrastructure projects. It draws on the theories of value and identifies that value is generated in the interaction of the supply side (i.e., governments - as project sponsors and part of infrastructure delivery partnerships) and the demand side (i.e., end-users). In this sense, ‘public’ participation in transport is highlighted in the proposed framework to demonstrate that it is the combination of ‘traditional’ and ‘public’ VfM that together create a more meaningful VfM concept. To underpin the application of the framework, a dynamic VfM assessment process is developed that can facilitate the appropriate selection of a procurement method and assess its VfM throughout the project lifecycle. Unlike current examples, the framework is designed for both PPPs and their alternatives (e.g., conventional public sector procurement) and aligns ex-ante and ex-post VfM assessment. The enhanced model creates an opportunity for governments to recognise public VfM in transport interventions, shift their mindset from singular to multi-dimensional evaluation, and start to actually accumulate and exploit experience from past projects. As such, the contribution of this paper is twofold: (1) drawing upon theories of value, it depicts the ontology of VfM and addresses a missing ingredient in VfM assessment; and (2) it develops a holistic framework for the public sector to re-calibrate their VfM assessment policy when procuring transport projects.

Public-private partnerships: A dynamic discrete choice model for road projects

Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) are an effective vehicle for delivering critical infrastructure worldwide, particularly road transport assets (e.g., bridges, toll roads and tunnels). However, PPPs have been and continue to be controversial forms of project delivery as there are concerns about their ability to provide taxpayers with value for money (VfM). Current practice to determine VfM focuses on a ‘simplistic’ ex-ante evaluation referred to as the Public Sector Comparator (PSC), aiming to take a life-cycle approach to cost and benefits assessment. However, the complexity of transport projects renders the PSC ineffective and static evaluation of cost and benefits across their life-cycle. Therefore, the PSC cannot accommodate a project's environment's dynamic and changing nature. Acknowledging the limitations of the PSC, we develop and examine a dynamic discrete choice model that can be used to provide a VfM assessment for ‘road projects’. By validating the proposed model using two illustrative cases, the results suggest it can capture a more comprehensive assessment of cost components, functionality, and benefits specific to road projects and quantify the relationship between the consideration of different assessment elements and choice utility. Therefore, utilising the new model to assess VfM can enable policymakers to make more informed decisions about the employment of PPPs.

Should Value for Money Be the Sole Criteria in Opting for PPP Option for Infrastructure Projects?

Countries are increasingly using Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) to deliver infrastructure projects and there are a number of reasons why governments around the globe utilise PPPs in delivering infrastructure projects amongst which is the financial benefits of the project. In PPP projects, it is necessary for the host government to carry out an analysis to show that the proposed project is a viable venture. It has been argued by various practitioners and academics that the critical question from the government’s viewpoint is whether the project demonstrates good Value for Money (VfM) sometimes also called Value for Investment (VfI). This article examines the concept of VfM, PPPs as distinguished from traditional procurement. It also expatiates on the use and focus of VfM assessment in the PPP decision-making process and puts the VfM analysis into a broader, context by expanding its subsets which is a mix of both quantitative and qualitative analysis and the tools used in assessing if an infrastructure project demonstrates VfM, this paper also looks at the different criticisms, constraints and limitations submitted by different academics, institutions and practitioners on why VfM should not be the only factor to be contemplated in determining if PPP is the best option for delivering infrastructure projects or if the project should be skewed towards traditional infrastructure procurement. The article proffers key recommendations which can guide government institutions, agencies, and industrial sectors in using and improving the VfM analysis. The concluding section answers if VfM should be the sole criteria in reaching the determination of skewing projects towards PPP or Traditional Procurement. Keywords: public-private partnership, traditional public procurement, value for money, public sector comparator, infrastructure finance

Assessing Technologies for COVID-19: What are the Challenges for Health Technology Assessment Agencies? Findings From a Survey and Roundtable Workshop.

BackgroundTo date, health technology assessment (HTA) agencies have not been at the forefront of decision making regarding the adoption of interventions for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Instead, policymakers have prioritised rapid action in response to the pandemic emergency, with no assessment of value for money. As COVID-19 vaccination coverage increases and healthcare systems begin to recover, HTA agencies will be expected to assess technologies for COVID-19.ObjectiveWe aimed to identify the key challenges when assessing therapeutic and diagnostic technologies for COVID-19, from the perspective of HTA agencies, and identify whether there is a case for novel HTA methods and/or processes to address them.MethodsWe used a mixed-methods approach, by conducting an online survey of HTA agencies, to collect data about the challenges faced when assessing or planning to assess diagnostic and therapeutic technologies for COVID-19. The online survey was followed by a ‘roundtable’ workshop of HTA agencies’ representatives to discuss the results and to elaborate on their responses.ResultsWe received 21 completed surveys (response rate of 45%) and 11 of the respondents joined the roundtable discussion. Five themes emerged from the responses: assessing clinical effectiveness (44%), assessing cost effectiveness (19%), practical (19%), political (11%), and decision making (11%) challenges. At the roundtable, attendees elaborated on the challenges and identified two additional themes: how HTA agencies have responded to the pandemic to date, and how their role might change over time.ConclusionHTA agencies face both methodological and logistical challenges when assessing or planning to assess technologies for COVID-19. An interim best-practice HTA framework to address the key challenges would be valuable.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40273-021-01097-4.

Health-related quality of life among breast cancer patients compared to cancer survivors and age-matched women in the general population in Vietnam

PurposeThis study compared the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of breast cancer (BC) patients, survivors, and age-matched women from the general population in Vietnam to address the paucity of HRQoL research and contribute to the robust assessment of BC screening and care in Vietnam.MethodsThe standardised EQ-5D-5L instrument was incorporated in an online survey and a hospital-based face-to-face survey, and together with data from the Vietnam EQ-5D-5L norms study. χ2 tests assessed EQ-5D health profile associations and a Tobit regression model investigated the association between overall health status (EQ-VAS/utility scores) and sociodemographic and clinical characteristics.ResultsA total of 309 participants (107 patients undergoing treatment and 202 survivors who had completed treatment) provided usable responses. The dimensions that affected mostly the HRQoL of women with BC were pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Current patients and survivors differed significantly regarding HRQoL dimensions of mobility, self-care, usual activities, and anxiety/depression. Their health utilities were 0.74 and 0.84, respectively, compared with 0.91 for age-matched Vietnamese women in the general population (p < 0.001). Treatment status (survivor vs patient), younger age, higher monthly household income, and higher education levels were associated with higher health utility.ConclusionsThe results point to unmet needs in mental health support and well-being and for attention to be given to the development of a biopsychosocial system of cancer diagnosis, treatment, and care. The results will also inform future assessments of the comparative value for money of interventions intended to impact on breast cancer in Vietnam.

Program Evaluation of Population- and System-Level Policies: Evidence for Decision Making.

Policy evaluations often focus on ex post estimation of causal effects on short-term surrogate outcomes. The value of such information is limited for decision making, as the failure to reflect policy-relevant outcomes and disregard for opportunity costs prohibits the assessment of value for money. Further, these evaluations do not always consider all relevant evidence, other courses of action, or decision uncertainty. In this article, we explore how policy evaluation could better meet the needs of decision making. We begin by defining the evidence required to inform decision making. We then conduct a literature review of challenges in evaluating policies. Finally, we highlight potential methods available to help address these challenges. The evidence required to inform decision making includes the impacts on the policy-relevant outcomes, the costs and associated opportunity costs, and the consequences of uncertainty. Challenges in evaluating health policies are described using 8 categories: 1) valuation space; 2) comparators; 3) time of evaluation; 4) mechanisms of action; 5) effects; 6) resources, constraints, and opportunity costs; 7) fidelity, adaptation, and level of implementation; and 8) generalizability and external validity. Methods from a broad set of disciplines are available to improve policy evaluation, relating to causal inference, decision-analytic modeling, theory of change, realist evaluation, and structured expert elicitation. The targeted review may not identify all possible challenges, and the methods covered are not exhaustive. Evaluations should provide appropriate evidence to inform decision making. There are challenges in evaluating policies, but methods from multiple disciplines are available to address these challenges. Evaluators need to carefully consider the decision being informed, the necessary evidence to inform it, and the appropriate methods.[Box: see text].

Monte Carlo Simulations as a Tool to Support Quantitative Value for Money Assessment of Public Private Partnership Project

Value for money assessment is a crucial approach to compare the value of a project done by Public Private Partnership (PPP) with traditional government procurement. However, one of the most challenges in Value for money (VFM) assessment is uncertainty in inputs, which lead to imprecise output computation. To solve this issue, some practical studies suggest Monte Carlo Simulations (MCS) as a tool to support quantitative Value for money assessment to achieve reliable outcome estimation. Although many international researches focus on quantitative VFM analysis with the use of MCS, few Vietnamese studies conduct this issue. This research illustrates the application of MCS to support quantitative VFM assessment of PPP projects in Vietnam. A case study of a transport project in Vietnam is employed to demonstrate the model.

Aligning BIM and ontology for information retrieve and reasoning in value for money assessment

Value for money (VfM) assessments often lack effective automatic processes and reasoning support in public-private partnership (PPP) projects. To automate these assessments, this paper proposes a comprehensive approach that aligns with the goals of building information modeling (BIM) as the necessary information support and ontology for the knowledge process. The main contribution of this work is the retrieval of information from the BIM environment with the ontological knowledge base to enable more efficient and persuasive methods for project and finance management that facilitate decision-making rather than an experience-based approach. The constructed ontology can also be reused and further expanded to include project needs from end-user perspectives. This work is expected to further the research on expanding semantic BIM-based decision making in different infrastructure procurement projects.

Stochastic modelling of maintenance flexibility in Value for Money assessment of PPP road projects

Maintenance flexibility has been promoted as a value driver for long-term public–private partnerships (PPPs). However, the value and risk associated with this value driver have not been properly quantified in the Value for Money (VfM) assessment literature. To bridge the gap, a novel stochastic modelling methodology is proposed to characterize the complex interactions among the lifecycle cost (LCC), performance deterioration and maintenance strategies. Four different maintenance strategies are designed to emulate the practice in the traditional and PPP delivery methods. The LCC includes the direct maintenance cost, user cost, residual value, and payment deduction, the last three often being neglected in VfM assessments. Simulation-based optimization and dynamic programming analysis are used to determine the probability distributions of the LCC and the VfM. A hypothetical highway PPP project under an availability payment model is selected as a case study. The results show that maintenance flexibility is indeed able to reduce the LCC for the private party. However, this private efficiency, if not properly regulated, could cause a reduced asset residual value and an increased user cost, making the public party worse off. In addition, for all potential maintenance strategies, the public sector is found to retain significant lifecycle cost risk, largely in the form of user cost.

Protocol for an economic analysis of the randomised controlled trial of Improving the Well-being of people with Opioid Treated CHronic pain: I-WOTCH Study

IntroductionOver the last two decades, the use of opioids for the treatment of chronic pain in England has steadily increased despite lack of evidence of both long-term effectiveness in pain...

A BIM-Based Value for Money Assessment in Public-Private Partnership: An Overall Review

Public-private partnerships (PPPs) have proliferated and adapted to public development in recent decades; within it, the value for money (VfM) assessment defines the feasibility of the project procurement model as one of the essential components of PPP. However, evaluating the VfM in PPPs remains problematic. Given concerns about PPP profitability, a more integrated VfM evaluation is urgently needed to manage multiple indicators along the project lifecycle. Building information management (BIM), popular in architecture, engineering, and construction, provides resources that could support the VfM to a great extent. This paper uses a review approach to identify the current issues that are affecting VfM assessments and suggests that BIM, functioning throughout the PPP lifecycle, could support decision-making in VfM processes in order to satisfy service targets.

A Bayesian Network Framework for Comparing Project Delivery Methods

Public–Private Partnerships (PPPs) are innovative and evolving project delivery methods that have enabled public entities, such as local, state, and federal government agencies to pursue projects that were otherwise infeasible. Value for Money (VfM) is commonly used as a tool to evaluate PPP project delivery with traditional project delivery. In this work, a BN framework is presented for supplementing VfM analysis that allows for the combination of the quantitative and qualitative components of project delivery. The framework includes steps to develop BNs, analyze network scenarios and interpret the results. The proposed BN framework reduces the subjectivity and bias inherent in VfM assessment. It, therefore, has the potential to supplement the decision-making process. We demonstrate the application of the proposed framework to California’s Presidio Parkway Project as a case study. The results corroborate the findings from the VfM assessment and conclude that for the Presidio Parkway project, design–build–finance–operate–maintain is a better method than the traditional design–bid–build project delivery method.

Developing an information exchange scheme concerning value for money assessment in Public-Private Partnerships

Value for money (VFM) as the procurement justification assessment approach in Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) essentially justify the overall project feasibility in both qualitative and quantitative ways. However, the performance measurement in VFM still lacks automation and information exchange schema. Concerning the project management domain within the Architectural–Engineering–Construction/Facility Management (AEC/FM) sectors, Building Information Modelling (BIM) is emerging as a potential solution for owners to automate the process of value for money assessment. Based on the published performance structure in PPP procurement, This paper develops a novel schema to formalize the information exchange needed to support data extraction and performance measurement. The schema was achieved by referencing the standardised Information Delivery Manual (IDM), which specifies the required information exchanges. This proposed method facilitates the automatic VFM assessment thus benefit the PPP procurement. Software development and case study model are presented towards the validation of the schema and methods employed.

Directing research funds to the right research projects: a review of criteria used by research organisations in Australia in prioritising health research projects for funding

ObjectivesHealthcare budgets are limited, and therefore, research funds should be wisely allocated to ensure high-quality, useful and cost-effective research. We aimed to critically review the criteria considered by major Australian...