If government funds were ‘magically’ released for your health policy project, explain how you could use this economic model to justify costs; discuss at least two domains i.e., need for the project, design, process/implementation, impact, efficiency
Your paper should be a minimum of 5 pages, not including the reference page, and should follow standard APA format.
Answer preview
which indicates that an intervention generates more benefits than it costs to implement. Despite this, the ratio can be misleading. When one gets a negative ratio, meaning that an intervention does not save more than it costs, one cannot ascertain whether this ratio emanates from a negative denominator or numerator (CDC, n.d.). A negative numerator indicates that the benefits are captured as “negative costs,” while a negative denominator indicates that costs are captured as “negative benefits” (CDC, n.d.). This means that it is easy for one to manipulate how benefits and costs are described to arrive at a ratio one desires. Due to this, people can show a larger ROI than it is by either capturing costs as negative benefits or capturing benefits as negative costs (CDC, n.d.). The most effective strategy to overcome this shortcoming is using net benefits as a summary metric. This is obtained by subtracting net costs from net benefits, ensuring a positive ROI when net benefits are more than zero.
