Advancing the Power of Economic Evidence to Inform Investments in Children, Youth, and Families (2016) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
5 A Roadmap for Improving the Use of High-Quality Economic Evidence
5 A Roadmap for Improving the Use of High-Quality Economic Evidence
Pages 211-230
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 211... ...
After providing a brief overview of those chapters, this chapter consolidates these suggestions into a roadmap for achieving this goal. This roadmap encompasses fostering multi-stakeholder partnerships to address cross-cutting issues related to the use of economic evidence, understanding what consumers and producers of economic evidence want each other to know, building a coordinated infrastructure to support the development and use of economic evidence, and providing stronger incentives for the production and use of better evidence -- all with a foundational understanding that recognizing the needs of end-users is a critical prerequisite for success.
|
From page 212... ...
Chapter 3 addresses issues related to the report's first principle, quality counts. The committee offers guidelines and best practices for the design, conduct, and reporting of high-quality economic evaluations so that the evidence produced is useful to its intended end-user(s)
|
From page 213... ...
R ECOMMENDATION 2: In support of high-quality and useful economic evaluations of interventions for children, youth, and families, produc ers of economic evidence should follow the best practices delineated in the checklist below for reporting the results of cost analyses, cost effectiveness analyses, and benefit-cost analyses and related methods. 1Chapter 2 identifies in detail the producers of economic evidence.
|
From page 214... ...
These efforts might build on existing effective multi-stakeholder organizations that seek to support the production of high-quality economic evidence and its use for policymaking and intervention decisions, including the Jameel Poverty Action Lab (supported by the Hewlett, MacArthur, and Nike Foundations) , the Prevention Economics Planning and Research (PEPR)
|
From page 215... ...
CONCLUSION: Long-term, multi-stakeholder collaborations that in clude producers, consumers, and intermediaries can provide vital sup port for the improved use of economic evidence to inform decisions on investments in interventions for children, youth, and families. Understanding What Consumers and Producers of Economic Evidence Want Each Other to Know Recognizing the inherent difficulties faced by both consumers and producers of economic evidence and their often limited time for developing the types of relationships that a collaborative can help foster, the committee generated the listing in Box 5-3 of what consumers and producers of economic evidence want each other to know, regardless of the setting.
|
From page 216... ...
2. Either directly or through intermediaries, consumers need to be able to distinguish between higher- and lower-quality economic evaluations.
|
From page 217... ...
. One current effort aimed at supporting access to administrative data is PEPR's Administrative Data for Accelerating Prevention Trials (ADAPT)
|
From page 218... ...
Multi-stakeholder groups also could augment the capacity of the field of economic evaluation by training more producers of economic evidence, as well as helping to develop more informed consumers. To this end, these groups could engage in strategic trainings focused on best practices and methodologies for generating high-quality economic evidence.
|
From page 219... ...
CONCLUSION: Multi-stakeholder groups can play a larger and more impactful role in building coordinated infrastructure to support the development and use of high-quality economic evidence. The committee identified an important role for foundations and government funders not simply in sponsoring or even requiring economic evaluation, but also in building up the infrastructure that supports its use at various levels.
|
From page 220... ...
Multiple stakeholder groups -- including funders, policy makers, program developers, program evaluators, and publishers engaged in science communication -- contribute to the production of economic evidence. Each of these groups can either facilitate or impede the production and use of high-quality, high-utility economic evidence.
|
From page 221... ...
By using evidence as an entrance requirement, i3 creates an incentive structure that encourages local education agencies to generate solid evidence of the impact of their programs. Building on these examples, funders could craft analogous incentive structures around the goal of producing high-quality, high-utility economic evidence for many types of interventions for children, youth, and families.
|
From page 222... ...
Program development could benefit from cost analyses conducted prospectively to assist decision makers in understanding how the structure, setting, or scope of an intervention will ultimately influence downstream costs, such as the costs of implementation (Gorksy and Teutsch, 1995; Haddix et al., 2003)
|
From page 223... ...
Evaluators could incentivize support for such prospective work in a number of ways -- even as simple as expressing a preference for high-quality economic evaluation during consultations, on professional websites, or when working with professional organizations to advertise and publish papers on program evaluation that promote prospective analyses. Program evaluators also could support the production and use of higher-quality and more useful economic evidence by working to access administrative data systems that may house key information on program costs or outcomes (see Chapter 4)
|
From page 224... ...
Whenever possible, publishers could also engage reviewers with methodological expertise in economic evaluation. Additionally, publishers could consider opportunities to promote more extensive use of economic evidence for those substantive topics for which such evidence could prove most productive.
|
From page 225... ...
: - or a reported percentage of all funded programs, set aside F sufficient resources for economic evaluation, at a minimum for collection of the data needed for prospective cost analysis in support of cost-effectiveness or benefit-cost analysis. - ncrease internal capacity to review economic evaluations by I engaging experienced program evaluators.
|
From page 226... ...
- dvocate for prospective planning of economic evaluation as a A way of improving program evaluation. - ork with government agencies to access administrative data W systems and develop those longitudinal data sets most likely to be useful for economically evaluating future, not just current, interventions, as in the areas of children's education and health.
|
From page 227... ...
. Prevention Effectiveness: A Guide to Decision Analysis and Economic Evaluation.
|
From page 228... ...
. Do health-care decision makers find economic evaluations useful?
|
From page 229... ...
. The Pew Charitable Trusts.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.