Framing a Cost Benefit

Attachment L Framing a cost benefit.docx

Interventions to Reduce Shoulder MSDs in Overhead Assembly

Framing a Cost Benefit

OMB: 0920-0964

Document [docx]
Download: docx | pdf








Attachment L:

Framing a Cost Benefit Analyses (CBA)






































Define the following:

Description

Step 1: The problem

The objective of the study is to examine how the costs of the TS and E interventions compare with the benefits.

Step 2: Control options

TS and E interventions versus no control

Step 3: Audience

TEMA and employees, other manufacturers

Step 4: Perspective

TEMA

Step 5: Time frame and Analytic horizon

Two years from implementation of TS and E interventions (e.g. short enough that the outcomes are not unacceptably uncertain, but not long enough to capture fully the costs and benefits that are attributable to the program, and to account for seasonal variations in program activity levels and targeted health outcomes),

Step 6: Discount rate

6% (to compare benefits and costs that occur at different times by adjusting their values according to the time preference corresponding to the chosen perspective)

Step 7: Format

Key data was derived by a prospective experimental design (in Phase)


Benefits


Costs

Direct costs averted

  • Averted workers’ compensation costs (both medical and indemnity)1


Indirect costs averted

  • Reduced or averted costs of absenteeism2

  • Reduced or averted costs of presenteeism2

  • Reduced turnover costs3


Value Added

  • Improved product quality2

  • Improved task efficiency2

Direct costs

Tool Support (TS)

  • New/ replacement equipment 2

  • Equipment installation2

  • Equipment maintenance2

Exercise Program (E)

  • Personnel time (to attend and conduct training) 2

  • Training materials2


Indirect (productivity losses)

  • Productivity losses to company attributable to program2

  • Productivity losses to employees attributable to program2

Intangible benefits3

Averted pain and suffering from back injury

Intangible costs3

Stress on employees caused by program


1Estimated using Toyota historical data (e.g. frequency/ costs for shoulder related MSDs associated with overhead work in processes similar to those targeted during Phase B)

2Estimated using data collected during Phase B

3Not estimated for this study


The formula for NPV, where: r = discount rate (interest rate), t = year, and n = analytic horizon (in years) is: The formulas for ROI are presented below: , or


File Typeapplication/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
AuthorLowe, Brian D.
File Modified0000-00-00
File Created2021-01-29

© 2024 OMB.report | Privacy Policy