HEALTH CARE AND HUMAN SERVICES POLICY, RESEARCH, AND CONSULTING - WITH REAL-WORLD PERSPECTIVE.
Estimating the Economic Impact of HRSA OHRP Outreach and Network Development Grantees
Carol J. Simon, PhD
September 2009
2www.lewin.com
ORHP EIA Project Purpose
Purpose: measure the economic impact of ORHP grantees in their communities: ORHP grants as “Mini-Stimulus” packages How have Grantees used funds? What is the impact of that spending on job
growth and economic activity Target: the 3rd and 4th year Rural Outreach and
Network Development program grantees EI Team:
The Lewin Group The University of Washington Rural Health Research
Center Mark Doescher & Sue Skillman
3www.lewin.com
Goal– a tool for estimating Economic Impact (EI)
Deliverable: easy-to-use formulas to measure Economic Impact Separate versions for Outreach program and the Network
Development program grantees
Formulas will be utilized by current & future grantees to demonstrate the potential long term impact of programmatic investment on rural communities
Demonstrating economic impact can be a vehicle for sustaining funding and support
4www.lewin.com
What Is An Economic Impact Analysis?
Economic Impact analysis tracks the reach of program dollars
Translates project-specific impacts into community-wide effects Jobs created Spending that supports local businesses and
taxes Impact of new or expanded services on the well-
being of the population Bottom line: every dollar invested by
HRSA creates more than a dollar’s worth of value in the community
5www.lewin.com
Type of economic impacts
Direct impacts are measured by the new health & community services and the number of jobs that are generated by grantee activities (e.g., wages, salaries and benefits paid directly to grant-supported employees)
Indirect impacts are the result of a “second round” of spending that occurs when the grantees purchase goods and services from local businesses
Induced impacts occur when employees of the grantees and of the firms that sell goods and services to the grantees in turn spend their earnings on local goods and services. This effect multiplies the initial program effects.
6www.lewin.com
Framework for Economic Impact Analysis
HRSA Program Support Dollars
Rural grantees
Direct impact
Employment
Ind
irect
imp
act
Health services
Local Spending on goods
and services
Spending multiplied$
$
New programs, sources of support
$
Community factors and economic environment
7www.lewin.com
Why It Is Important to Conduct EIA for ORHP Grantees?
Used to demonstrate program value and argue for on-going support
Help understand the timing and extent of program impacts in the community
Build the business case to other funders and attract new financial and in-kind resources that can leverage the reach of HRSA dollars
Identify high-performing grantees and understand best practices
Benchmark grantee performance against expected norms
8www.lewin.com
Steps in Development of the EIA Formulas & Models
Select study sample Review grantee documentation Contact program grantees and collect information
Jobs, spending to provide services, infrastructure investment, community impact area
Data organization Estimate the multiplier model Apply to grantees Estimate the long term increase in jobs, spending and
economic activity in the community
9www.lewin.com
Sample of Grantees
Study Sample Selection Criteria used in selecting 3rd and 4th year grantees
Assured geographic representation Assured adequate numbers of HIT, Network, and
Outreach grantees Assured representation of all major issue areas
identified by ORHP and grantees 3rd year grantees recommended by ORHP and program
staff 20 as the total (15 Outreach, 4 Network Development, and 1
HIT)
Selected 20 4th year grantees 13 Outreach, 4 Network Development and 3 HIT
10www.lewin.com
Characteristics of Contacted Grantees by Covered Issue Areas
Issue Areas # of GranteesObesity / Chronic Illness 9Access to Healthcare Services 6Health Promotion / Outreach 8Behavioral/ Mental Health 5Oral Healthcare 4EMS 2Quality Improvement 7Patient Safety 1Pharmacy Services 2Other 3
Note: Some grantees may have multiple issue areas to cover.
11www.lewin.com
Grantee Characteristics
geographic representation
12
11
10
3
Midwest Northeast South West
grantee program
7
429
Network HIT Outreach
12www.lewin.com
Key Data Needs-- overview
Program and project information: Spending: HRSA & co-funded spending
Health care services Educational services IT Infrastructure
Employment Clinical Administrative Technical
Co-funding and in-kind support Grantee Information:
Program activities Number and location of sites
Community information: Service area Economic, political and social environment
13www.lewin.com
Key Data Needs- detail
Program and project information: HRSA grant and program; primary objectives, funding, budget/spending on staff and labor, expenditures on health services, expenditures on infrastructure (type), number and types of health services provided, FTE staff and functions, information on new services or expanded functions made possible by the grant.
Grantee Information: Grantee size (FTE, $) and type (e.g. health center, provider organization, research organization, etc), number and location of sites, affiliations with larger/parent/network organizations, other relevant HRSA funding, other funding supporting grant activities, taxes paid.
Community information: Name and size of community, location, demographic and economic descriptive information. Community and environment factors affect the size of economic impacts, and “multipliers” (i.e. the extent to which local activity multiplies in the local economy and health sector).
Grantee contact information: from the directory of grantees, grantee profile, annual reports, and ORHP web sites.
14www.lewin.com
Data Collection: Documentation Review and Data Capturing Protocol Development
Review HRSA program documents Application, non-competing renewal, sustainability assessments,
profiles
Prepare data capture protocols for interviews Flexibly organize data across grantees involved in a wide range
of activities (e.g., health promotion, disease management, access to care)
Easy and informative Feed into Excel-based database Examine different economic impacts as well as the pathways by
which the initiatives affect the community and region Respond to grantee questions
15www.lewin.com
Data Collection: Contact Program Grantees
Develop contact strategy for phone interviews with grantees
ORHP sent introductory message
Interview protocol offer structured scripts and guidance on the
conversation with grantees
Schedule and implement phone interviews
Phone calls took place between late December 2008 and April
2009
Grantees were exceptionally enthusiastic and supportive –
excellent collaboration in data collection (thank you!)
37 out of 40 completed: good representation across
geography and program type
Data availability: Percentage of grantees able to access various types of data
92%86% 86% 89%
84%
43%
92%84% 81%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
tota
l HR
SAfu
ndin
g
HR
SA $
spe
nt o
nPe
rson
nel
HR
SA $
spe
nt o
nEq
uip&
supp
lies
HR
SA $
spe
nt o
nco
ntra
ctor
s
Tota
l ava
ilab
lefu
ndin
g
Spen
ding
det
ail,
supp
lem
enta
lfu
nds
Geog
raph
icar
eas
serv
ed
Empl
oym
ent
volu
ntee
r FT
Es
17www.lewin.com
Lessons Learned from Data Collection
Key lessons learned Some programs evolved from what was proposed in the
grantee’s initial grant application Considerable variation in the way that grantees documented
finances required flexibility in identifying types of spending
Important elements & success factors Recognize variability among grantees with regard to how they
count the services they deliver Probes and examples helpful
Service area is key: many grantees need assistance conceptualizing and measuring their “reach”
Differentiate in-community versus outside spending Track donated and in-kind services and discounts Identify in-kind services from partnerships
18www.lewin.com
Observations -- 2
Network Development grantees were often fundamentally different in their staffing practices many Networks had no direct employees, only contractors
or consultants. Network Development grantees were at times challenged to
define their respective service areas. Some Network grantees may cover “all rural areas in the state”, yet have offices in just one area, which could make balanced EIA formulations challenging.
some grantees that are in the process of expanding their network boundaries to neighboring states.
19www.lewin.com
Observations & Feedback
Information on spending and employment were good: Either provided in the interview or were fairly easily
obtained/verified from accounting staff. Qualitative support to the numbers was in abundance. Grantees
could generally speak in terms of hard numbers and qualitative context for their service communities.
Conversely, in-kind items and donated services (both estimations of value and systematic tracking) often were less frequently reported as, for many grantees, this was not a need, and thus the resources were not put into tracking.
Some grantees did not systematically track figures on training done by staff, or health and/or other services provided Some did not maintain systematic tracking of total visits versus
unduplicated visits, or non-direct services provided (e.g., referrals). Difficult to construct this information retrospectively
20www.lewin.com
Observations -- 3
Outreach grantees that are part of a county health department could capitalize on in-kind or shared labor labor provided by staff and executives (e.g., directors and
coordinators) who were compensated in-part or in total by other funding sources, leaving more HRSA dollars available for other program activities.
However, with so many funding sources, these grantees sometimes thought more in terms of the global project instead of individual funding sources.
Increasingly, all programs noted they were relying on supplies and equipment from national vendors, as many rural areas are limited in retail offerings. This puts many grantees at a disadvantage for positively impacting their area’s local economy.
21www.lewin.com
Observations -- 4
Internal Grantee Barriers Staff turnover and internal shifting of responsibilities affected
a few of the grantees and makes data collection and overall management more challenging.
Data Collection Issues that are Likely to Persist Many grantees are short staffed and the project directors and
coordinators may wear multiple hats for purposes of grant administration as well as within their parent organizations.
Many grantees only thoroughly track and report what is absolutely necessary.
Variability in program expenses from year to year will likely persist, as grantees’ needs change and priorities shift during implementation.
Allocation of HRSA funding versus supplemental funding will continue to be a struggle as grantees continue to often pool their resources.
22www.lewin.com
Recommendations for Future EIA Related Data Collections
It will be useful to provide clear data collection guidelines at the implementation of the grants
It may also be helpful to make technical support available for these tasks
Engage grantee personnel who have good knowledge on the EIA relevant aspects
Grantees’ operating programs or networks within existing organizations (e.g., a health department, hospital, state hospital association), appear to have the advantage of being able to capitalize on existing economies of scale.
23www.lewin.com
EIA Formula Model Development
Application of multipliers to the collected grantee data Summarize direct impacts of grantee initiatives on local
employment, spending, and service provision Apply multipliers of the selected Input-Output model to the
summarized data Calculate direct and indirect economic impacts
Develop user-friendly formulas for future grantees Populate formula model using the EIA study results Test model fit by comparing the predicted impact value
against the actual data of the sample grantees Apply coefficients to develop formulas for future grantees Add user-friendly interface to model to enhance user
convenience (*optional)
24www.lewin.com
Example to Demonstrate the Economic Impact Calculation
Grantee example
Hypothetical Network Development Grantee
Multipliers/Community
Missouri community
Data organization & simplified calculations
Use sample simplified (disguised) data that was collected from documentation review and grantee interviews
25www.lewin.com
Sample Data Summary – Show-me State Network Grantee
3-year Budget 1-year Budget NoteTotal of HRSA designated fund 591,000$ 197,000$ Personnel 177,300$ 59,100$ Equipment/supplies 3,000$ 1,000$ Contract 393,600$ 131,200$ Contract locally 100% Other 17,100$ 5,700$ Supplemental fund 340,590$ 113,530$ TOTAL FUND 931,590$ 310,530$
CommunityServed Geographic Area State of MontanaPopulation 56,396Employment Paid FTE 2.3 Volunteer FTE 7Total FTE 9.3
26www.lewin.com
Grantee & Community Characteristics
The size and geographic reach of the grantee’s service area affects the multiplier: larger areas –> higher multiplier
Unpaid, volunteer labor and in-kind services are important to many grantees: underestimating these can lead to an understatement of the impact
Community Characteristics: rural areas outside Kansas City
Population in communities where operate
56,000
Grantee Employment
Paid 2.3
Volunteer 7.0
Total 9.3
27www.lewin.com
Investment multiplies as it moves thru the community
Each dollar of investment by HRSA Creates direct program
jobs, services & $$$ Creates indirect (multiplied)
value as the new employees spend in the community
The more the community spends locally, the larger the multiplier
Can feedback to create new support for HRSA grantees
Jobs,
Services
$$$
HRSA Grant to
Community Organization
Spur
local
economic
activity
28www.lewin.com
The “multiplier” measures how many times new dollars recycle in a local community
Example: HRSA grantee spends $311,000 in their first year
Creates $726K in local economic value
Of which $223,00 in in the form of increased wages and earnings
Multipliers are specific to the industry and the size of the service area – health care has an above average “multiplier” effect (2.33)
Multiplier
x(grantee spending)
= Economic Impact
“Output”
2.3369 X 311,000 $726,000
“Earnings”
0.71 X 311,000 $223,000
29www.lewin.com
The “multiplier” measures how many new jobs are ultimately created from expanded economic activity
Example: HRSA grantee hires 2.3 FTEs But attracts an additional 7.0
volunteer FTE in administration
Total employment = 9.3 FTE Jobs multiplier for technology
services = 2.4031 For administrative services
= 1.102 Volunteer labor is important! Multipliers are specific to the
industry and the size of the service area – health care has an above average “multiplier” effect
Multiplier
X new hires
= Economic Impact, new jobs
“tech Jobs”
2.4031 X 2.3 5.527
“admin jobs”
1.102
X 7.0 (volunteer) 7.714
Total new jobs 13.241
30www.lewin.com
Grantee Activities create significant community value
Each dollar invested results in over 2 new dollars of value in this example Health care and technology have high multiplier values Expanding the service area increases value
Cautions: Need to be realistic about “reach”: understand, but don’t
overestimate impact area Understand the functions and effort provided by volunteers,
co-funding and in-kind support
31www.lewin.com
Next Steps
Calculate economic impact values for the sampled grantees
Build the multiplier model Develop a template tool that grantees can use:
Inputs: Grantee activities & focus: health care, education,
network infrastructure Jobs & classification Spending by type of spending Geographic area served
Excel-based tool to calculate impacts
32www.lewin.com
THANK YOU!
We are extremely grateful to the HRSA Outreach and Network Development grantees who have worked with us on this project.
~we couldn’t do it with out your time and effort!
The EI Team at the Lewin Group and University of Washington Rural Health Research Center