| A | B | C | D | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Kano | notes | ||
2 | Use of modern contraception | |||
3 | Percent of women using modern contraception without radio messaging campaigns | 29.5% | (not directly used in calculations, for reference only) | |
4 | Increase in modern contraceptive use due to radio messaging campaigns (pp) | 5.9% | (not directly used in calculations, for reference only) | |
5 | Number of additional women using contraception due to donation | |||
6 | Program cost per additional woman using contraception | $3 | See "Sample costs and coverage" sheet | |
7 | Government contraceptives provision cost per additional woman using contraception | $20 | See "Government costs and savings" sheet | |
8 | Government savings from avoided pregnancies per additional woman using contraception | -$7 | See "Government costs and savings" sheet | |
9 | Net cost per additional couple-year of protection | $11 | Calc (not used in calculations, for interpretation only) | |
10 | Arbitrary donation | $100,000 | Arbitrary | |
11 | Internal validity adjustment | 50% | ||
12 | External validity adjustment | 75% | ||
13 | Number of additional women using contraception due to donation | 11,264 | Calc | |
14 | Total government spending | $148,002 | Calc | |
15 | Total spent by all contributors | $248,002 | Calc | |
16 | Benefit - couple-year of protection (CYP) | |||
17 | CYPs per additional woman using contraception | 1.5 | Assumption | |
18 | Total CYPs due to radio messaging campaigns | 16,895 | Calc | |
19 | Value assigned to one CYP | 0.92 | Rough guess | |
20 | Total units of value from CYPs due to radio messaging | 15,561 | Calc | |
21 | Initial results | |||
22 | Initial cost per CYP | $15 | Calc (not used in calculations, for interpretation only) | |
23 | Initial units of value generated per dollar spent | 0.063 | Calc | |
24 | Initial cost-effectiveness estimate in multiples of cash transfers | 18.7 | Calc, cash transfer value based on GiveDirectly CEA | |
25 | ||||
26 | Leverage/Funging adjustment | |||
27 | Total expenditure attributable to different actors | |||
28 | Sample charity | $100,000 | ||
29 | Domestic government | $148,002 | ||
30 | Total expenditure | $248,002 | ||
31 | Counterfactual value of spending from domestic government (units of value per dollar) | 0.005 | Based on our CEA, using weighted average of 80% health, 10% education, 10% social security | |
32 | Probability of scenarios in absence of charity spending | |||
33 | Scenario 1: Government costs would replace charity's costs | 10% | Best guess | |
34 | Scenario 2: Government financial costs would stay the same | 0% | Best guess | |
35 | Scenario 3: Distributions would go unfunded | 90% | Best guess | |
36 | Expected change in government spending on the program in absence of charity's spending | |||
37 | Scenario 1: Government costs would replace charity's costs | $100,000 | ||
38 | Scenario 2: Government financial costs would stay the same | $0 | ||
39 | Scenario 3: Distributions would go unfunded | -$148,002 | ||
40 | Units of value generated by changes in amount of government spending on the program in absence of charity's spending | |||
41 | Scenario 1: Government costs would replace charity's costs | 6,274 | Calc | |
42 | Scenario 2: Government financial costs would stay the same | 0 | Calc | |
43 | Scenario 3: Distributions would go unfunded | -9,286 | Calc | |
44 | Units of value generated by changes in amount of funding spent on counterfactual programs by government in absence of charity's spending | |||
45 | Scenario 1: Government costs would replace charity's costs | -507 | Calc | |
46 | Scenario 2: Government financial costs would stay the same | 0 | Calc | |
47 | Scenario 3: Distributions would go unfunded | 750 | Calc | |
48 | Net units of value created by changes in spending by government in absence of charity's spending | |||
49 | Scenario 1: Government costs would replace charity's costs | 5,767 | Calc | |
50 | Scenario 2: Government financial costs would stay the same | 0 | Calc | |
51 | Scenario 3: Distributions would go unfunded | -8,536 | Calc | |
52 | Net units of value created by charity's spending | |||
53 | Scenario 1: Government costs would replace charity's costs | 507 | Calc | |
54 | Scenario 2: Government financial costs would stay the same | 6,274 | Calc | |
55 | Scenario 3: Distributions would go unfunded | 14,810 | Calc | |
56 | Results after leverage/funging adjustment | |||
57 | Total units of value generated, after accounting for leverage/funging | 13,380 | Calc | |
58 | Units of value generated per dollar spent by charity | 0.134 | Calc | |
59 | Cost-effectiveness estimate in multiples of cash transfers (adjusted, after accounting for leverage/funging) | 39.9 | Calc, cash transfer value based on GiveDirectly CEA | |
60 | Change in cost-effectiveness from leverage/funging (%) | 113% | Calc | |
61 |