return on investment

as a result of the Change Your Choices programme could save the Trust £7,500 producing a 1.36:1 return on investment. If ASB decreased by 50% over three years the gross saving would be £37,500. Adjusted for attribution this return would still be a £1.13:1 return for the Trust prior to the addition of the societal gains from its efforts. However, this number is likely to increase once additional savings such as repair, graffiti cleansing, and decreased void times are taken into account. As the programme unfolds, CWHT will attempt to track the young people’s progress both during the programme and afterwards for a period of at least two years to establish the impacts on the range of potential outcomes identified at the outset. This will concentrate on individual achievements, the avoidance of negative outcomes and the reduction of agency involvement. This is not always easy as youth schemes are often run on the basis that the young people are not questioned about their past or tracked concerning their progress once they leave the scheme. However, if permission for tracking is agreed, at least for some of the participants, then the SROI calculation would be able to include the full impact of the intervention.

In summary, and despite the challenges of a one-size fits all methodology when determining the return on investment (ROI) of a particular higher education institution, this study provided evidence that college ranking systems are useful in determining an institution’s ROI. This study provides a framework for conducting similar future analyses. Not only could this study be replicated by using Scorecard data from other states, it could also use data provided by other ranking systems (e.g., the Princeton Review, Forbes College Rankings, etc.). Additionally, future research could expand to include other types of institutions (e.g., two-year colleges, for- profit/proprietary, etc.), as well as specific programs of study. Furthermore, international higher education systems could conduct similar research based on the techniques and metrics offered in this study.

As the planning, design and initial capital investment was paid for through grant funding, IDEx is an example of how the State of Indiana has leveraged federal grant funding to initiate projects that will result in immediate and long-term cost savings and efficiencies within the State. Additionally, the initiative includes a demonstrable return on investment – from both an IT cost savings and a business cost avoidance perspectives. The details of the expected ROI from the IDEx initiative are highlighted below. Of note, this return on investment analysis is an exercise to explore if all data sharing gaps and needs identified in the strategic planning phase were implemented, what would it cost in a point-to-point manner, and what would it cost in an enterprise environment? This analysis is not suggesting that all data sharing gaps and needs will be implemented; rather, it is a math exercise to show the potential savings between the current approach with point-to-point exchanges verses the enterprise approach with one to many. Therefore, the analysis is not intended to recommend that all exchanges would – or should – be implemented, nor is the analysis intended to advocate that the state must spend money to save money. Rather, the analysis intends to demonstrate that if data exchanges among agencies continue to be developed as is anticipated, what is the more cost effective option – to continue down the current point-to-point path, or rather implement the exchanges in an enterprise, managed model?

What is this tool? When your hospital invests in a new program, quality improvement intervention, or technology, management often wants to know what kind of financial return it will achieve for that investment. A return on investment (ROI) analysis is a way to calculate your net financial gains (or losses), taking into account all the resources invested and all the amounts gained through increased revenue, reduced costs, or both.

Cost, value, return, in short, measurement. It is impossible to consider carrying out any business-related activity or service properly if these concepts are not on the decision-making agenda. Being able to measure the value generated, to plan the environment in which the multiplier effect of an investment’s value will be of the greatest benefit to users, and to achieve the maximum return on investment within its economic dimension, has been the objective of health managers and decision-makers for years.

www.HDRGreen.com HDR is a trusted partner with a track record of success in sustainable architecture, engineering and consulting. We are committed to offering our clients the best possible economic, social and environmental value by delivering integrated sustainable solutions. Our Sustainable Solutions Program includes an internal Corporate Sustainability Initiative, a Climate Change Initiative and services in the following areas of expertise: buildings, mobility, water, energy, waste, community, site development and sustainable return on investment (SROI).

We hypothesize that by using published data that quan- tify the value of prevention practices, an empirical method can be developed to determine the efficacy of mobile healthcare programs. Specifically, mobile health- care programs annually provide a broad array of preven- tion services to as many as 4 million otherwise un-served individuals. Recent, ground-breaking research from the National Commission on Prevention Priorities (NCPP) assigned a relative value to various prevention practices in terms of quality adjusted life years saved (QALYS). When combined with research that estimates the value of a sta- tistical life year saved, and applied to mobile healthcare data, the result projects a return on investment (ROI) ratio of at least 30:1, a value both significant and compelling. We believe that this methodology can be enhanced, and applied to mobile healthcare programs across the USA to quantify the value of their current services as well as sup- port the process of prioritization of target populations and interventions that promise the greatest return for healthcare dollars invested. We believe that such a ROI calculator will be an innovative and effective method of quantifying the value of mobile healthcare programs within the US healthcare system.

This prospective return on investment (ROI) study quantifies the costs and benefits of implementing NAZ solutions with Brandon, a typical child living in the Northside Achievement Zone. Brandon and his family will be enrolled in NAZ for five years (not necessarily consecutively) and will participate in some of NAZ’s most popular programs. According to the NAZ model, even if Brandon is falling behind his peers early on, Brandon and his parents will participate in intensive solutions to ensure that he becomes proficient in age-appropriate reading and math. Once proficient, Brandon and his family can take charge of Brandon’s success on their own, knowing that NAZ is ready to lend a helping hand if Brandon starts to fall behind.

The model predicts that, due to a per-computer reduction in patch man- agement costs from US$222 to US$40 per year, an automated patch management solution will yield an annual savings of approximately US$182,000 . In other words, without even accounting for any of the additional benefits, automated patch management will provide a return on investment (ROI) of approximately 450 percent, essentially paying for itself in less than three months .

The return on investment by utilizing Hardcat’s asset management software is effectively measured by the cost savings enjoyed from better utilization of existing asset investment through better tracking of assets, together with the time savings by all employees who are involved with any aspect of asset management, particularly with regard to time and money spent on reporting and on maintaining in some cases a multitude of existing asset management applications. From past experience, even a relatively small organization (less than 25 employees) with 500 assets can easily save $30,000 per annum. The larger the company and its assets the more significant the savings.

This paper demonstrates that the marketing return on investment (MROI) can be inversely related to profits in healthy, high performance firms. In light of this, the authors contend that MROI is a poor metric for evaluating profitable performance, because lower MROI is not always a sign of poor performance and higher MROI is not always a sign of higher performance. However, MROI can be converted into an elasticity of efficiency and used as a diagnostic tool to help marketing managers choose more profitable levels of promotion. MROI in the role of a diagnostic tool has stronger theoretical foundations than in its role as an evaluation metric. The paper presents the elasticity of MROI to changes in marketing expense as a practical tool for marketing managers to improve the profitability of marketing.

Foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows into the Nigerian economy has not been stable. Notwithstanding this fluctuation, the country is still one of the largest destinations of FDI inflows in Africa. It is empirically unclear how return on investment affects FDI inflows in Nigeria. This paper investigates the effect of return on investment on FDI in Nigeria using yearly data for the period 1971 to 2015 by means of the (ARDL) approach. The study reveals the existence of a cointegration relationship among return on investment, electricity infrastructure, official exchange rate, real GDP growth, political instability, and FDI net inflows in Nigeria, It showed that both short-run and long-run relationships exist between return on investment and FDI net inflows, while both electricity and real GDP growth only has a long run relationship with FDI inflows. The Granger Causality Test reveals a unidirectional causality running from return on investment to FDI net inflows and not vice versa. The paper submits that return on investment, electricity infrastructure, and real GDP growth, exerted a positive and statistically significant influence on FDI net inflows in Nigeria. This shows they are important factors in determining FDI inflows. However, both official exchange rate and political instability did not have any significant effect on FDI net inflows both in the short-run and in the long-run. Thus, it is recommended that the Nigerian government should sponsor and host programs that will create the awareness that Nigeria is an investors’ haven.

eb 2.0 has enabled a whole new way for companies, user communities and others to engage each other. Social Media (SM) platforms (i.e. blogs, micro-blogs, social networks, video/photo upload sites), in particular, comprise a flourishing new set of eWOM and viral marketing mechanisms that are growing exponentially. More and more global companies are using SM –some because they know it works, others because they’re afraid they may suffer in the marketplace if they don’t use it. How much they spend, and how long they continue to spend it, will depend on how effective SM proves to be in the long run. The measurement of SM effectiveness, or return on investment (ROI), is key. This paper provides a summary overview of the SM ROI literature where there is a vast range of opinions, models, and calculations in both academic and trade journals. It also suggests that the SM ROI issue is far more complex than most report, and provides a business “unit of analysis” framework for better understanding this complexity. It also discusses SM ROI measurement within the context of business process/performance management basics and suggests guidelines and principles for how and when to proceed with such measurement.

The development effort increases as the cube of the size of the software product, if the schedule remains constant. Also, the effort increases as the inverse of the fourth power of development time for a fixed program size. It is found that a static model of the software development life cycle that treats all modules similarly is becoming inadequate to the task. In this paper efforts are made to quantify the concept of return on investment and factors responsible for improving the return on investment. we are trying to justify the effort expenditure and how to optimize the effort expenditure in the software development environment.

Abstract Over the past several years, companies are pairing diversity efforts with inclusion initiatives and roles surrounding innovations that promote diversity of thought [13]. However, much return on investment (ROI) focus has been on business and corporate functioning in general, but not on specifics related to information governance (IG). We address this research gap byconsidering various return on investment (ROI) metrics and what might ground the benefits of diversity and inclusion initiatives related to IG policy. Then, wesuggest what the results mean in terms of changing and influencing current industry practices.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the return-on-investment (ROI) of agile methods. Agile methods are new product development processes for creating software-based goods and services. Agile methods are a lightweight alternative to traditional methods based on sequential product development processes created over the last four or five decades. The use of traditional methods is theorized to result in higher quality software products because of well- documented customer requirements and products that exhibit fewer problems over their life cycle. Agile methods on the other hand are used to achieve higher customer satisfaction and product quality through rapid implementation and early market testing. The ROI of agile methods is yet to be fully explored because of their newness, while the ROI of traditional methods is well-understood. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to investigate and summarize the literature on the ROI of agile methods. These results show that the use of agile methods results in increased cost-effectiveness, productivity, quality, cycle-time reduction, and customer satisfaction ranging from 10% to 100%.

Representing the exploratory portion of this analysis, Hanover would create scatterplots, investigating the relationship between school-level academic outcomes and district-level per pupil expenditures. We emphasize that the results of this exploratory analysis should be treated with caution, as this approach does not account for variations in academic outcomes and expenditure levels based on differences in school and district student populations. Rather, this would provide some initial insight into whether a relationship may exist between financial resource allocations and student academic outcomes that could be explored further, using regression-based techniques such as those discussed in Phase 2. Lastly, this first phase of research will allow Hanover to better determine whether the second phase will be feasible. As school-level financial data are not available at this time (only district-level data), and given the relatively small number of school districts in the state, we are concerned that the sample size available for the return on investment analysis proposed below will not be large enough to support meaningful estimates of return on investment. As described in the following subsection and in the “Data Overview,” we will request additional information regarding school-level finances from the Department. However, in the event such data are unavailable, we will provide the DDOE with a firmer assessment of the feasibility of the second phase as part of our Phase 1 deliverable.

and, when reasonable, it is indicated the possible metrics to measure them. As it can be seen in the matrix in next paragraph, the parameters have an opposite distribution in the matrix; the most part of the costs are perfectly quantifiable and there are a lot of benefits that are partially or not measur- able. This aspect is a hallmark for the person who has to decide about SCM introduction, because the model assures to consider even the worst case. Considering the first column parameters it is shown a possible way to evaluate when the return on investment is achieved. This ROI evaluation is based on the estimation of the time that has to elapse in order that total benefits equals total costs. It does not consider the discount rate because, according to the previous studies [5] and [1], the return on the investment should come in few months. For this reason it is plausible that the contribution of the investment discount rate is irrelevant for the ROI evaluation.

Quality of life and quality of care will be the result of the implementation and as a result of the efficiencies and re-allocated time, more direct care can be provided.. Immediate and[r]

Traditionally, when IT professionals and security management officials consider the ROI and overall value proposition of solutions investment, discussions primarily emphasize direct financial benefits realized when adopting the involved solution(s). However, when reviewing the intrinsic strengths of embracing a Proactive Security Intelligence approach to management of network security device infrastructure, it is worthwhile to detail how this methodology also facilitates the evolution and improvement of many other related processes.