The CBA adopted in this study is a valuable tool for understanding the value for money of CICA and investigating whether extra benefits arise from the outweigh costs of its implementation in GM, UK.
Set-up and running costs of Communities in Charge of Alcohol intervention
The total cost to implement CICA, including the optimism bias, was £115,065. Most of the cost was incurred to design and implement the first-generation training activities (£76,050; 66%), followed by the second-generation training (£21,374; 19%), AHCs (£9416; 8%) and project management (£8225; 7%). Analysing each cost element, the training design and delivery and the development of the training package (in the first-generation training component) were the main cost drivers of the intervention (50% of the total costs). The cost to deliver the training was £40,392 or 35% of the total cost. The cost of the design and development of training package was £17,136 or 15% of the total costs. A third cost driver of CICA was time and revenue in all cost components, reaching £37,291 in total, that is 32% of the total cost. The total capital and revenue costs were similar and summed at £58,446 (52%) and £50,806 (44%), respectively (see Table 28). Figure 13 shows all activities included in each cost domain and the types of costs incurred.
| Cost | Type of cost | Total | Optimism bias (%) | Total cost |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Project management | ||||
| Time | Revenue | 6713 | 10 | 7383 |
| Transportation | Revenue | 765 | 10 | 842 |
| Total 1 | 7478 | 8225 | ||
| First-generation training | ||||
| Design and development of training package | Capital | 16,800 | 2 | 17,136 |
| Training delivery | Capital | 39,600 | 2 | 40,392 |
| Qualification and assessment fees | Revenue | 1200 | 5 | 1260 |
| Travel and venue | Revenue | 3408 | 5 | 3579 |
| Advertising, stationery | Revenue | 220 | 5 | 231 |
| Time | Revenue | 12,811 | 5 | 13,452 |
| Total 2 | 74,039 | 76,050 | ||
| Second-generation training | ||||
| Qualification and assessment fees | Revenue | 1385 | 5 | 1454 |
| Accreditation fee | Capital | 900 | 2 | 918 |
| Room hire | Revenue | 963 | 5 | 1011 |
| Photocopy | Revenue | 264 | 5 | 277 |
| Travel | Revenue | 737 | 5 | 774 |
| Catering | Revenue | 470 | 5 | 484 |
| Time | Revenue | 15,672 | 5 | 16,456 |
| Total 3 | 20,390 | 21,374 | ||
| AHCs activities | ||||
| Engagement materials | Revenue | 3424 | 5 | 3595 |
| Time | In kind | 5292 | 10 | 5821 |
| Total 4 | 8716 | 9416 | ||
| Total | 110,623 | 115,065 | ||
FIGURE 13 Set-up and running costs of CICA intervention. (Figure not reproduced here; see the original article.)
Effectiveness results
In CICA implementation areas, there was an increase of 2% in ambulance calls, whereas, in the control areas, the percentage increased by 11% during the weekends. The weekday figures were similar, with an increment of 2% in CICA areas and 10% in the control areas. The reduction of ASB was identical in CICA and non-CICA regions, 22% and 23%, respectively. We could not find any other significant impact for the rest of the outcomes. Due to the small effect of the intervention on the outcomes included in the analysis, CICA did not present economic or social benefits in GM. CICA had a negative overall financial return on investment (−1.66) and negative public value return on investment (−4.68). There was no fiscal return on investment for the local authority. Table 29 shows the cost–benefit results for the financial and economic cases and local authority.
| Financial case (fiscal CBA) | Financial year (£) | NPV (£) | |||
| 2019–20 | 2043–44 | ||||
| Actual costs | Costs | 115,074.13 | – | ||
| Benefits | −190,740.02 | – | |||
| Discounted costs | Costs | 115,074.13 | – | 115,074.13 | |
| Benefits | −190,740.02 | - | −190,740.02 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 305,814.14 | Net present budget impact | ||
| −1.66 | Overall financial return on investment | ||||
| – | Payback period (years) | ||||
| Economic case (public value CBA) | Financial year | NPV | |||
| 2019–20 | 2043–44 | ||||
| Actual costs | Costs | 115,074.13 | – | ||
| Benefits | −539,079.65 | – | |||
| Discounted costs | Costs | 115,074.13 | – | 115,074.13 | |
| Benefits | −539,079.65 | – | −539,079.65 | ||
| −654,153.77 | Net present public value | ||||
| −2.14 | Public value for money BCR | ||||
| −4.68 | Public value return on investment | ||||
| Local authority | Financial year | Net present value (NPV) | |||
| 2019–20 | 2043–44 | ||||
| Actual costs | Costs | 115,074.13 | – | ||
| Benefits | −232.06 | – | |||
| Discounted costs | Costs | 115,074.13 | – | 115,074.13 | |
| Benefits | −232.06 | – | −232.06 | ||
| 0.00 | Local authority fiscal return on investment | ||||
| – | Payback period (years) | ||||