Order Cost Benefit Analysis r

Free essays 0 Comments

COST-BENEFITANALYSIS OF PROJECT: ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMUNITY-BASED CENTERS ANDPROGRAMS OF FACILITATING PRENATAL CARE FOR PREGNANT TEENAGERS FROMDISADVANTAGED OR LOW-INCOME BACKGROUNDS IN THE UNITED STATES

Abstract

Thesubject of teenage pregnancy forms a disturbing issue among thepublic. The situation causes adverse impacts on the families andlives of affected persons, making young girls to drop out from schooland lose hope of achieving bright futures. The resultant effect isthat most that the young women become financially dependent on othermembers of society like family members, relatives, and friends. Thispaper offers a Cost Benefit Analysis of a proposed project ofestablishing community-based Centers and programs to facilitateprenatal care for pregnant teenagers from disadvantaged or low-incomebackgrounds in the United States. The project will impose a cost of$50 billion on the economy of the country.

Establishmentof Community-Based Centers and Programs of facilitating Prenatal Carefor Pregnant Teenagers from disadvantaged or Low-income backgroundsin the United States

Alot of money is spent on costs associated with issues of teenagepregnancies in the United States. The disturbing problem is that mostteenage pregnancies occur in the minority in the country, who comefrom low-income and or poor backgrounds (Burke, et al., 2014). Thispaper elaborates an analysis of the subject matter with considerationof factors and parameters of curbing limited access to prenatal careamong pregnant teenagers in the country. The cost- benefit analysisreveals that the successful undertaking of the project will go a longway regarding saving American lives, as well as meeting the highcosts that pregnant teenagers from low-income backgrounds have tomeet to attain prenatal care.

Evenin the modern times of today, there still exist notable challenges inthe American society regarding solving the growing problem of teenagepregnancy. Some initiatives targeting this cause include but are notlimited to teen pregnancy support groups and other organizedmovements of health care clinics, community-based organizations, andschools or learning institutions. Overall, little has been realizedin eliminating this problem ineradicably, in fact, general trendsimply that the problem is even increasing more and more per diem.Hueston, Quattlebaum, &amp Benich, (2008) explicitly posit the gravenature of this issue. They postulate a need for change in approach,claiming that early prenatal care helps greatly in reducingassociated costs of teenage pregnancy. This invokes any thinker’smind to contemplate on possible solutions about early parenting andteenage pregnancy. It is common knowledge today that the UnitedStates has the highest rate of teenage pregnancies in the world(Hueston, Quattlebaum, &amp Benich, 2008). Many teenage girls becomevictims of suffering from this plight of life. Most of them arecaught off guard and or unprepared to face the consequences of havingearly sexual exposure. The larger American society ought to approachthis issue with the solemnity it deserves. Under no conditions shouldit be considered that the decision of young teenage girls to engagein sexual activity remains a matter of their personal choice andresponsibility. It should be considered that many teenagers today areforced to deal with the issue of absent parents. For adolescents, inparticular, the issue of lacking father figures is also not a pointto disregard.

ThisCBA analyzes the benefits and associated costs of the project ofestablishing community-based Centers and programs to facilitateprenatal care for pregnant teenagers from disadvantaged or low-incomebackgrounds imposing a cost of $50 billion on the economy of thecountry. It is at this moment established that the social benefits ofthis project undertaking outweigh the overall cost of $50 billion byfar. It is well understood that such an endeavor represents a mostvaluable application of the mentioned monetary resources. It impliessaving of American lives and is such a project that is worthy for theAmerican society to implement.

Furthermore,it is imperative to note that teenage pregnancies remain a matterthat plagues communities of all nations of the world in particular,people of low-income and or poor backgrounds are the most affected.Even though the rate of teenage pregnancies in the United States hasrecorded a notable decrease, the detrimental effects of theoccurrence still have far-reaching implications for the affectedpersons. A fundamental aspect to note is that high rates of teenagepregnancies correlate with elevated levels of abortions and highrates of Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs) as well endangering,even more, lives in the process. This reality lies in the fact thatgreat deals of teen pregnancies are because of lack or disregard forthe use of birth control or contraceptives (Lawlor, &amp Shaw,2004). In other words, teenage pregnancies are associated with therisky behavior of having unprotected sex, albeit disparities in thissense are somehow attributed to elements of ethnicity and background.The proposed community centers and programs will engage indissemination of valuable information among the youth to curb thischallenge.

Affectedteenagers that receive prenatal care incur less indirect costsassociated with pregnancies and arising complications than those whodo not get the care. As such, there is an apparent need for prenatalcare among the teenagers of America from middle and low-classbackgrounds. Even though the burden of teenage pregnancy andattention is more in developing countries, it still poses a challengein the developed countries like the United States. Even so, thecauses for this trend seem to differ between the two settings. In thedeveloping world, the causes include illiteracy, backward traditionsand poverty, while they involve peer pressure, and media influencesamong others in developed countries (van Veen, Haeri, &amp Baker,2015).

Keyassumptions regarding the challenges of teenage pregnancy involve thethought that prenatal care costs are limited to costs associated withroutine hospital visits, usual prenatal tests, and deliveries (Price,Kent, Springer &amp Brooks, 2010). The truth is that other expensesinclude costs of ultrasound and Down syndrome screening, tests forneural tube, streptococcus and gestational diabetes inter alia. Theother factor that is a serious concern but often disregarded involvesmalnutrition, over and above other pre-existing health conditionsthat vary from individual to individual. Into the bargain, thebudgeted costs of the healthcare sector in the United States do notreflect the reality on the ground, indeed, more needs to be done.

Han,Teal, Sheeder, and Tocce, (2014), are adamant that the indirect costsassociated with the issue of teenage&nbsppregnancy&nbspinpoor communities in the United States stand at around $30 billion onan annual basis. Of course, these indirect costs do not include costsof setting up and maintaining more community health centers andprograms that form the basis of the proposed project discussedherein. The cost of $50 billion to be incurred by the economy of thecountry is but a rough estimate for the initiation of the project. Inconsideration of the future, the dollar values of the initial $50billion costs are very low, of course, in comparison to the mentionedbenefits.

TheCost-Benefit Analysis, and Cost-Benefit Ratios for the Project,Basing on the Region

Region

Residents below poverty line in percentage

The Economic cost

in dollar values

Total economic benefit in dollar

values

Cost-Benefit ratio

Cleveland, Ohio

36.1

200,000,000

10,000,000,000

1:5

Detroit , Michigan

42.3

2,750,000,000

3,000,000,000

11:12

Miami, Florida

31.7

900,000,000

1,000,000,000

9: 10

Cincinnati, Ohio

34.1

5,700,000,000

8,000,000,000

Fresno, California

31.5

17,000,000,000

34,000,000,000

1: 2

St. Louis, Missouri

29.2

1,500,000,000

3,000,000,000

1: 2

Buffalo, New York

30.9

15,000,000,000

20,000,000,000

3:4

Milwaukee, Wisconsin

29.9

13,000,000,000

26,000,000,000

1: 2

Toledo, Ohio

30.1

950,000,000

1,000,000,000

19: 20

Newark, New Jersey

30.4

8,000,000,000

10,000,000,000

4: 5

TOTAL

100

50,000,000,000

116,000,000,000

25: 58

TheCBA analytical strategies used involve a Cost Benefit model,Hypothetical Intervention Model, and Sensitivity Analysis. The CostBenefit model incorporates parameters of the probability of LBW andcesarean deliveries to determine average monthly costs. As a benefit,this paper also considers the amount of money that early prenatalcares for teenage pregnancies save. Table 1 depicts the incrementalbenefits of cost savings of early prenatal care based on the monthwhich a pregnant teenager started prenatal care. Evidently, there isan apparent effect of time elected for the commencement of prenatalcare among pregnant adolescents.

Basingon the Cost Benefit model that incorporates parameters of theprobability of low birth weight (LBW) and cesarean deliveries todetermine average monthly costs, Hueston,Quattlebaum, and Benich, (2008) determine that that the costs ofprenatal care remain relatively constant regardless of when the carewas done. Overall, however, prenatal care results in considerablecost savings (see Table 1). Prenatal care facilitates cost savings ofbetween $2,369 and $3,242 per person, about no provision of parentalcare. The primary variable factor being when or at what stage of thepregnancy the care was initiated

Instriving to analyze the subject matter, the CBA investigatesoccurrences of low birth weight (LBW) of infants in poor communitiesas an indicator of the importance of prenatal care in teenagepregnancy in the US. This is mostly associated with the universalaspect of Preterm in teenage pregnancies. Based on months ofinitiation of prenatal care for pregnant teenagers, the CBA revealsthat there exist little disparities associated with the time ofinitiation of care but that complete absence of the care yields highrates of LBW (see Table 2).

Asa recommendation and in summary, this paper emphasizes that prenatalcare for pregnant teenagers is indeed beneficial regarding costsavings and that the proposed project should be undertaken. It isrecommended at this moment that the project of parental care beinitiated all over the country and that individualized care and forcare-deserted pregnant teens be ensured by the public health sectorof the United States. A crucial factor of motivation would be asHueston et al. (2008) claim an average cost allocation of $95 wouldserve to reduce LBW in teenage pregnancies by 50%. The mainlimitation of this recommendation lies in the fact that it fails totouch on the issue of quality of prenatal care provided. Also, thereare no considerations hereby discussed in relation to otherconditions such as malnutrition and other health complications.

Thus,teenage pregnancy and the roles of the government, schools, andparents in curbing the problem form a heightened concern in theUnited States. The subject matter should, therefore, be offeredimmediate and serious attention as the paper proposes theEstablishment of Community-Based Centers and Programs of facilitatingPrenatal Care for Pregnant Teenagers from disadvantaged or Low-incomebackgrounds in the country at a cost of $50 billion.

Appendix

Table1. The Incremental figures of Cost Savings (in dollars) for PregnantTeens as per month of initiation of prenatal care

month of Prenatal Careinitiation

Costs saved

1 or 2

2274

3

2457

4–6

2580

7–9

3146

None

0

Source:Hueston, Quattlebaum, &amp Benich, (2008).

Table2. Rates of LBW as per month of Initiation of Prenatal Care

LBW % in association with time of initiation of Prenatal Healthcare

Introduction of Prenatal HealthCare (Month)

&nbspLBW Rates %

1 or 2

9.9

3

9.4

4 to 6

9.3

7 to 9

7.9

NONE

21.5

Source:Hueston, Quattlebaum, &amp Benich, (2008)

References

Burke,J. G., Albert, S., Steenrod, J., Folb, B., … &amp James, E.(2014). What can be learned from the types of community benefitsprograms that hospitals already have in place?.&nbspJournalof health care for the poor and underserved,&nbsp25(1),165-193.

Teal,K S, Tocci, B., Sheeder, J., &amp. Han, L., (2014). Preventingearly pregnancy in the adolescents: This is immediate postpartuminsertion of the contraceptive implant cost effective?.&nbspAmericanjournal of obstetrics and gynecology,&nbsp211(1),24-e1.

Benich,J. J., Quattlebaum, R. G., &amp. Hueston, W. J. (2008). Howconsiderable cash can early prenatal care for teen pregnancies save?:A cost-benefit analysis. The Journal of the American Board of FamilyMedicine, 21(3), 184-190.

Lawlor,D. A., &amp Shaw, M. (2004). Teenage pregnancy rates: high comparedwith where and when?. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine,97(3), 121-123.

Price,J. L., Kent, C., Springer, E., &amp Brooks, J. (2010). Economiccosts of mandatory contraceptive and pregnancy care coverage fordependent minors by health insurers in West Virginia.&nbspCenterfor Business and Economic Research, Marshall University.

VanVeen, T. R., Haeri, S., &amp Baker, A. M. (2015). Teen Pregnancy:Are Pregnancies following an Elective Termination Associated withIncreased Risk for Adverse Perinatal Outcomes?.&nbspJournalof pediatric and adolescent gynecology,&nbsp28(6),530-532.

OUTLINEfor CBA presentation

Tittle:COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF PROJECT: “ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMUNITY-BASEDCENTERS AND PROGRAMS OF FACILITATING PRENATAL CARE FOR PREGNANTTEENAGERS FROM DISADVANTAGED OR LOW-INCOME BACKGROUNDS IN THE UNITEDSTATES.”

  1. Thesis statement: successful undertaking of the project will go a long way regarding saving American lives, as well as meeting the high costs that pregnant teenagers from low-income backgrounds have to meet to attain prenatal care.

  1. Body 1

  1. There are significant challenges of solving the growing problem of teenage pregnancy in the American society despite efforts of initiatives of teen pregnancy support groups, health care clinics, schools or learning institutions and community-based organizations.

  2. The United States has the highest rate of teenage pregnancies in the world.

  1. Body 2

  1. Project will involve establishing large-scale and nationwide community-based Centers and programs to facilitate prenatal care for pregnant teenagers from disadvantaged or low-income backgrounds imposing a cost of $50 billion on the economy of the country

  2. Americans will rip the benefits of saving lives of children lost to complications of teenage pregnancy, and the government will meet the associated indirect costs of challenges of teen pregnancy from a poor background.

  3. High rates of teenage pregnancies correlate with elevated levels of abortions and high rates of Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs).

  1. Body 3

  1. Assumptions regarding the problems of teen pregnancy involve the thought that prenatal care costs are limited to costs associated with routine hospital visits (depending on month of commencement of attention, which determines the number of occurrences), prenatal attention analysis, costs of cesarean and vaginal deliveries and costs for care of child during the first after birth

  2. Other additional costs pertain but are not limited to undertakings of ultrasound, group B streptococcus, gestational diabetes, and scanning the neural tube defects and Down syndrome.

  3. Indirect costs associated with the issue of teenage&nbsppregnancy&nbspin the United States stand at around $30 billion on an annual basis (Han, et al., 2014). Prenatal care facilitates cost savings of between $2,369 and $3,242 per each pregnant teenager (Table 1 &amp2) also, an average cost allocation of $95 would serve to reduce Low Birth Weight (LBW) in teenage pregnancies by 50%. (Hueston, Quattlebaum &ampBenich, 2008).

  1. Conclusion:

Thesubject matter should be subject to immediate and severe attentionand facilitation by the government and other related parties in theprivate sector.

Appendix

Table1. The Incremental saved costs for Pregnant Adolescents Dependent onthe Month Prenatal Care was initiated

Prenatal CareBegan (month)

Costs saved

1 or 2

2274

3

2457

4–6

2580

7–9

3146

None

0

Source:Hueston, Quattlebaum, &amp Benich, (2008).

Table2. Rates of LBW as well as the Cesarean Delivery for the AdolescentsBased on the Month of Prenatal Care Initiation

LBW % in association with time of initiation of Prenatal Healthcare

Initiation of Prenatal HealthCare (Month)

&nbspLBW Rates %

1 or 2

9.9

3

9.4

4 to 6

9.3

7 to 9

7.9

NONE

21.5

Source:Hueston, Quattlebaum, &amp Benich, (2008).

References

Tocce,K., Teal, S. B., Sheeder, J., &amp. Han, L. (2014). Preventing therecurrence pregnancy in adolescents: is immediate postpartuminsertion of the contraceptive implant cost effective?.&nbspAmericanJournal of the obstetrics plus the Gynecology,&nbsp211(1),24-e1.

Benich,J. J., Quattlebaum, R. G., &amp Hueston, W. J. (2008). How muchmoney can the adolescent prenatal care for teen pregnancies save?: Acost-benefit analysis.Journal of American Board of the Family Medicine,21(3), 184-190.