I N FO R M I N G P

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

OL

CY

CT

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

COST WORKGROUP

COST ANALYSIS IN
PROGRAM EVALUATION
A GUIDE FOR CHILD WELFARE RESEARCHERS
AND SERVICE PROVIDERS

Create an estimate
of total costs

Estimate program
component costs

$$
Estimate costs
per participant

$$$

BU I L

D I NG E V I

DE

NC

This page intentionally left blank.

Acknowledgments
Building on the momentum created during the 2011 National Child Welfare Evaluation Summit, the Childrens Bureau
convened three Child Welfare Research and Evaluation Workgroups. Each workgroup examined a particular evaluation
topic or issue with the goal of improving child welfare research and evaluation and strengthening the link between
research and practice. The Calculating the Costs of Child Welfare Services Workgroup created this guide. Workgroup
members included:
Melinda Baldwin
Federal Co-lead
Children's Bureau

George Gabel
National Resource Center for Child Welfare Data
and Technology

James Bell
James Bell Associates

Sylvia Kim
Children's Bureau

Roseana Bess (co-author)

JBS International, Inc.

Melissa Lim Brodowski*

Children's Bureau

Andrew Burwick (co-author)

Mathematica Policy Research

Christine McPherson
Formerly with Bay Mills Health Center

Crystal Collins-Camargo*
University of Louisville

Hanno Petras (co-author)

JBS International, Inc.

Phaedra Corso*
University of Georgia

Michael Shaver*
Children's Home + Aid

Curtis Crouch
North Carolina Department of Health
and Human Services

Zili Sloboda (co-author)

JBS International, Inc.

Brian Deakins
Federal Lead
Children's Bureau
Emily Fisher (co-author)
JBS International, Inc.
John Fluke
American Humane Association

Douglas Swisher
Tennessee Department of Children's Services
Tammy White*
Children's Bureau
Fred Wulczyn
Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago
Brian Yates*
American University

*Denotes Steering Team member. The Steering Team was primarily responsible for providing guidance to the principal authors.

Suggested citation:
Calculating the Costs of Child Welfare Services Workgroup. (2013). Cost analysis in program
evaluation: A guide for child welfare researchers and service providers. Washington, DC: Childrens
Bureau, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
This product was created under JBS International, Inc., Contract No. HHSP23320095638WC funded
by the Childrens Bureau, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services. The content of this product does not necessarily reflect the official views of the
Childrens Bureau.

> Table of Contents

Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A Conceptual Framework for the Role of Cost Analysis in Program Evaluation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Key Concepts and Principles in Cost Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Defining the Purpose and Scope of the Cost Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Conducting the Cost Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
References and Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Appendices. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Appendix 1. Illustration of Cost Analysis of an Intact Family Services Program. . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Appendix 2. Illustration of Cost Analysis of a Home Visiting Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

 I N FO R M I N G P

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

OL

CY

CT

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

COST WORKGROUP

BU I L

D I NG E V I

DE

NC

COST ANALYSIS IN PROGRAM

EVALUATION: A GUIDE FOR CHILD
WELFARE RESEARCHERS AND
SERVICE PROVIDERS
> Introduction
Child welfare decision-makers at all levels (local, State,
Federal, and Tribal) are accountable to a variety of
stakeholders for the distribution of scarce resources
to improve outcomes for children and families. In this
context, it is important to know which reform efforts and
interventions have the greatest likelihood of achieving
desired outcomes, for which participants, in the most
cost-effective manner. A systematic cost analysis provides
stakeholders information about the monetary value of
resources used to deliver services along the continuum of
child welfare programs from prevention to permanency.
When a consistent approach is used to collect and analyze
cost data, cost analysis can also support comparisons of
costs across services, programs, and agencies.
While child welfare administrators regularly estimate
the costs of services for budgeting purposes, evaluationoriented cost analyses remain rare in the child welfare
field (Goldhaber-Fiebert, Snowden, Wulczyn, Landsverk,
& Horwitz, 2011). Analyses that have been conducted
or are underway use various methods to collect cost
data and develop cost estimates.1 As a result, comparing
estimates produced by different studies of similar services
or programs can be difficult.
Increasingly, Federal agencies require cost analyses to
be a part of the evaluations of the projects they fund. Many
options exist for analyzing program costs as part of broader

evaluation efforts (Yates, 2009), and cost data collection

and analysis are more likely to be successful when they are
included in evaluation planning from the outset.
This guide, developed by a group of experts assembled
by the Childrens Bureau within the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services, provides support for child
welfare service providers and evaluators interested in
conducting cost analyses, especially as part of broader
evaluations of child welfare services. The guide begins
by offering a framework for integrating cost analysis
into program evaluations, which supports successful
implementation of cost analysis and produces a fuller
understanding of the programs or services studied.
Next, the guide presents key principles and concepts in
cost analysis. It then provides guidance for defining the
scope and purpose of a cost analysis and determining
the information needed to conduct it. Finally, it explains
core steps in conducting a cost analysis and describes the
advantages and disadvantages of specific methods for
collecting and analyzing cost data.
In text boxes throughout, the guide presents an
example of cost analysis for one type of child welfare
service, in-home services, to illustrate the methods
described and opportunities for integrating cost analysis
into broader program evaluations. More detail about this
example and a second example of a cost analysis of a
home-visiting program are presented in the Appendices.

For example, the Washington State Institute for Public Policy (Lee et al., 2012) calculates return on investment for social programs using
cost estimates from various sources, including existing studies and budget information from program developers. The Cost Calculator
(Chamberlain et al., 2011), developed by Harriet Ward and other researchers at Loughborough University, employs an ingredients
approach to costing child welfare services. It identifies core child welfare practice processes, disaggregates them into discrete activities,
and estimates costs for these activities. The resulting information is combined with child-level placement data to estimate the total cost of
care for a child over a period of time. The economic analysis included in the ongoing Mother and Infant Home Visiting Program Evaluation
(MIHOPE) collects cost data at both the family level and the site level. The data gathered from each site are then summarized across sites
and home visiting models (J. Ingels, personal communication, April 11, 2013).

Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau| 1

 I N FO R M I N G P

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

OL

CY

CT

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

COST WORKGROUP

Process Evaluation

Figure 1. Logic Model

Integrating Cost Analysis
with Program Evaluation

Program
Outputs

Program
Inputs

Context
Priorities
Mandates
Mission/Vision
Local Dynamics
Stakeholder Buy-in

Outcome/Impact Evaluation

Program Outcomes
& Impact

Activities

Personnel &
Non-personnel
Resources

Outcomes
Target
Participants

Direct Costs and Indirect Costs

Effectiveness, Utility,
& Benefits

Cost Analysis

Cost Evaluation

> A Conceptual Framework for

the Role of Cost Analysis in
Program Evaluation
Analyses of program costs can produce measures
that provide important insight into the operation of
child welfare programs, including the overall cost of
implementing and sustaining a program, costs for specific
program activities, and costs per program participant.
Cost analyses also establish a foundation for other types of
economic analysis, such as comparisons of program costs
and benefits. Integrating cost analyses into evaluation
planning offers opportunities to build on information
collected through other evaluation components, such as
process, outcome, or impact studies.
Figure 1 illustrates the relationships among cost,
process, and outcome/impact evaluations. Cost analysis
relies on information about a programs implementation,
such as the specific programmatic activities, the type

and quantity of resources used in delivering program

services, the number and characteristics of people receiving services, and the intensity or dosage of services
provided. These kinds of informationprogram inputs
and outputsare also the focus of process evaluations,
which answer the questions of what is done, when,
by whom, and to whom.
Evaluations that include cost analysis and studies
of program outcomes or impacts may offer opportunities for cost-effectiveness or cost-benefit analyses (also
referred to as benefit-cost analyses). Cost-effectiveness
analysis examines the relationship between a programs
costs and a relevant unit of program effectiveness. For
instance, a cost-effectiveness analysis might assess the
programmatic cost per case of child maltreatment prevented. Cost-benefit analysis quantifies program benefits
in monetary terms and assesses whether they exceed
program costs. The precision of these analyses depends,
in part, on accurate analysis of program costs.

2 | Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau

BU I L

D I NG E V I

DE

NC

 I N FO R M I N G P

OL

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

CY

CT

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

DE

NC

Costs are resources used, not money spent.

D I NG E V I

The following concepts and principles are important to

consider when conducting cost analysis for program
evaluation.

BU I L

> Key Concepts and Principles

in Cost Analysis

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&
COST WORKGROUP

in the analysis (Haddix, Corso, & Gorsky, 2003; Foster,

Connor, & Nguyen, 2001). Cost analyses commonly
consider the perspective of: (1) the funding agency or
government; (2) the service provider or implementing
agency; (3) the client or recipient of services; or (4)
society as a whole. The perspective of society reflects a
combination of unduplicated costs to the government
(Federal, State, or local) or funding agency, the service
provider, and the recipient of services.

Cost analysis considers the value of all resources used

in providing a service, whether or not the resources
The questions that a cost analysis seeks to answer
were purchased directly by the program. Providing a
affect the choice of cost perspective. The illustrations of
child welfare service or operating a program typically
analyses in this guide focus on costs to the implementing
requires two general types of resources: personnel
agency. This information can be helpful to other agencies
and non-personnel (Corso and Filene, 2009). In many
considering replicating a program
social service programs, staff time
or service. Analyzing costs from the
is the primary resource necessary
COSTS ARE DEFINED AS
perspective of society is important
for delivering a service. In addition,
THE MONETARY VALUE
when a cost estimate is used in a
a program is likely to require nonOF THE RESOURCES
cost-benefit analysis that considers
personnel resources such as office
USED TO IMPLEMENT A
benefits accruing to both individuals
space and facilities, supplies and
PROGRAM (YATES, 2009).
and government.
materials, training, equipment,
contracted services, travel, and
utilities. Program participants also contribute resources
in the form of time spent in program activities and, in
some cases, out-of-pocket costs for transportation.
It is important to establish a value not only for
accounting costscosts that are likely to appear in agency
expenditure records and budgetsbut also for items that
an agency receives free of charge. A programs use of
resources at no costfor example, volunteer labor, donated
office space, and participants timecreates an opportunity cost for society, since those resources could be used
productively in other ways. The time that a participant
spends attending program activities might otherwise be
spent in paid employment, for example, while office space
donated to a program might be filled by another provider.
Moreover, services or items offered as in-kind contributions to one agency may need to be purchased by another
(Corso and Filene, 2009; Corso and Lutzker, 2006).

The perspective of the analysis affects the

costs considered.
Defining the perspective of a cost analysis answers the
question, Costs to whom? It operates as a filter for
selecting the set of cost elements that should be included

Costs must be adjusted to account for the

passage of time.
Several types of adjustments must be made to determine the value of costs that occur at different times.
Costs incurred in different years should be adjusted for
inflation so that all costs are measured in the same base
yearusually the earliest year considered in the analysis.
The Consumer Price Index (CPI) Inflation Calculator from
the Bureau of Labor Statistics (http://www.bls.gov/data/
inflation_calculator.htm) is available to assist with this
adjustment.
Adjustments must also be made to future costs to
reflect peoples time preferences with respect to costs.
A dollar in the present year is worth more than a dollar
in a future year because it can be invested and earn
interest. Conversely, a cost incurred in the future is
worth less in the present. This adjustment is important
when comparing costs and benefits that occur at different times or when comparing the costs of programs
implemented over different lengths of time (Centers for
Disease Control, n.d.). The present value of a future cost
is calculated by applying a discount factor. For more
on this topic, see: http://www.cdc.gov/owcd/eet/Cost/
Fixed/4.html#howdowediscountfuturecosts.

Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau| 3

 I N FO R M I N G P

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

OL

CY

CT

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

COST WORKGROUP

Finally, evaluators must adjust costs of resources

that are purchased in one year but have value in future
yearsfor example, a piece of equipment whose useful
life is expected to be more than one year (Haddix et
al., 2003). In this case, the annual cost of the resource
must be determined by annuitizing the capital cost
spreading the cost appropriately over the equipments
useful life. If a cost analysis covers more than one year,
this calculation must also discount costs that occur in
future years. For more on annuitizing capital costs,
see: http://www.cdc.gov/owcd/eet/Cost/Fixed/4.
html#annuitizingcapitalcosts.

Costs can be variable or fixed.

Variable costs increase or decrease with the level of
output, such as the number of participants served.
For example, a home visiting program intending to
serve additional families may need more educational
materials and, possibly, additional direct service staff,
thereby increasing personnel and non-personnel costs.
Fixed costs, on the other hand, do not vary with the
quantity of output. For example, rent, equipment lease
payments, and wages and salaries of administrative staff
are not likely to vary in the short term with the number
of clients served.

Cost analyses should distinguish between

marginal and average costs.
Marginal costs and average costs are two ways of relating
costs to the quantity of output, such as number of units
of service provided. The average cost of a service is the
total cost of a program divided by the total units of service
provided. For example, if the total costs of providing a
home visiting program during one year were $500,000
and the program provided 1,000 visits during the year, the
average cost per home visit would be $500. The marginal
cost of a service is the cost for providing one additional
unit of that service. The marginal cost of a service generally
excludes fixed costs. For instance, the marginal cost of a
home visit could be calculated as the value of staff time,
transportation, and educational materials required to
provide an additional visit.

> Defining the Purpose and Scope

of the Cost Analysis
Before beginning the cost analysis, the evaluator should
engage internal and external stakeholders (e.g., agency
leadership and staff, legislators, funders) to: (1) clarify the
goal and audience for the analysis; (2) clearly define the
service to be analyzed; and (3) specify the time period
to be covered.

What are the goals and who is the audience

for the cost analysis?
Evaluators should consider the questions that need to
be answered through a cost analysis, who needs the
information, and how the information will be used. For
instance, a cost analysis can be designed to compare the
costs of two programs, to explore the cost of expanding
an existing program, or to provide information needed
to compare a programs costs and benefits. At the
most basic level, a cost analysis can help child welfare
administrators understand the costs of providing a
program or service.

What program or service will be analyzed?

Before beginning a cost analysis, it is important to define
the intervention, service, or program to be analyzed
(Westat, Inc., Chapin Hall Center for Children, & James
Bell Associates, 2002). One way is to define the individual
activities or components that compose the program or
service, and its beginning, middle, and end. Creating a
program logic model can be helpful for this step.
When identifying program activities or components,
it may be helpful to begin by labeling broad categories
and identifying individual activities within each category.
In their cost study of the Family Connections program,
Corso and Filene (2009) analyzed costs by dividing them
into two broad categories: (1) direct service-related costs;
and (2) administrative costs. They further disaggregated
these two categories into specific activities. Activities
related to direct services included, for example, working
directly with clients, making referrals, and conducting
case management. Administrative activities included
provision and receipt of supervision, training, and outreach,
among others. Another approach to defining program

4 | Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau

BU I L

D I NG E V I

DE

NC

 I N FO R M I N G P

OL

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

CY

CT

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

NC

> Conducting the Cost Analysis

A common approach to calculating program costs is
the ingredient method (also known as the resource
cost method). This approach includes itemizing the
resources (or ingredients) necessary to provide services,
and calculating or estimating the costs of each resource
(Levin and McEwan, 2001). Researchers have advocated
this method as a means to develop cost estimates that

DE

Clearly defining the time period over which cost data

will be collected is also important (Brodowski and Filene,
2009). Cost analyses may cover several years to provide
information on how costs vary over time or focus on
a single year that is considered to be representative of
the programs typical operating state. Evaluators should
also specify the programs stage of implementation
during the cost analysis because costs are likely to differ
between a startup or planning period and a period
of steady-state implementation, when the program is
operating at or near full capacity.

D I NG E V I

What time period will be covered?

BU I L

activities is to identify individual steps or services that are

part of the service process. For example, intake, assessment, and case transfer might be the individual steps
identified for child protective services.

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&
COST WORKGROUP

reflect the value of all resources required for delivering

a service (Plotnik & Deppman, 1999; Boulatoff & Jump,
2007; Levin & McEwan, 2001). This section outlines how
the ingredient method can be applied to cost analysis
of child welfare services. By combining information on
the costs and use of resources with data on program
participation, an evaluator can develop estimates of the
total cost of a program, the cost of its key components
or activities, and costs per participant. The process
involves eight main steps:
1

Itemize resources used to implement the program

Collect data on resource costs

Collect data on resource allocation

Estimate the value of indirect costs

Create an estimate of total costs

Estimate costs of individual program components

or activities

Estimate costs per participant

Conduct sensitivity analyses and examine cost

variation

In describing the process, we highlight options for

tailoring the detail and comprehensiveness of data
collection to the goals of the analysis and resources
available to conduct it.

To demonstrate the integration of cost analysis and program evaluation, we provide an illustration of how
cost data could be developed for an evaluation of the effectiveness of intact family services provided by a
public child welfare agency. This illustration (which uses fictitious data) is presented throughout this section
in box insets.
Illustration of a Cost Analysis of Intact Family Services (In-Home Services)
The purpose of this analysis is to provide the public child welfare agencys leadership with the cost of a
core child welfare service in conjunction with the evaluation of the intact family services program as a
whole. Given this purpose, the analysis focuses only on the implementing agency's perspective and does
not consider the larger costs to society. That is, the analysis only considers the specific costs incurred by the
child welfare agency to deliver the program as intended.
Intact family services include case management and referral services provided to families that have been
reported to the public child welfare agency for child maltreatment and for whom a determination is made
that the child(ren) can remain safely in the home. The purpose of these services is to address the underlying
causes of the issue that brought the family to the attention of the child welfare agency.

Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau| 5

 I N FO R M I N G P

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

OL

CY

CT

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

COST WORKGROUP

Itemize Resources Used to Implement

the Program

The initial step in the analysis is to itemize the resources

necessary to implement the program or provide the
service. In general, resources can be categorized as
personnel and non-personnel.
Personnel resources include direct service staff time and
the proportion of management and administrative staff
time allocated to the program or service. It is important
not to assume that all management tasks are overhead
costs. Some management tasks are directly related
to a program or service, and managers may be able
to estimate the amount of time they spend on direct
program activities.
Non-personnel resources include all other items necessary for delivering the program or servicefor example, supplies and materials, equipment, office space,
and transportation.
The value of personnel and non-personnel resources is
then categorized into direct and indirect costs. A process
evaluation can help identify the kinds of resources used in
providing a program.

Collect Data on Resource Costs

Once resources required to operate a program are

specified, the evaluator should pinpoint sources of data
on resource costs and methods for collecting those data.2
Accounting records for the period covered by the
analysis are likely to be important sources of information
on staff salaries and other expenditures. Program
budgets are generally not good sources of information
for cost analyses, as they present anticipated, rather than
actual, costs. In addition, program budgets are likely to
be an incomplete accounting of resources required to
deliver a program. For instance, they may not reflect the
value of volunteer labor or donated supplies.
Data on resource costs also may be collected through
interviews with staff familiar with program operations
and expenditures, and/or surveys or templates designed
especially for this purpose. The templates can be divided
into sections addressing annual costs of personnel, buildings, and facilities; supplies and materials; equipment;
contracted services; and other categories on the ingredient list. Practical examples of templates for collection
of cost data include the Drug Abuse Treatment Cost
Analysis Program (http://www.datcap.com) and
the National Assembly on School-Based Health
Care Cost Survey (http://www.sbh4all.org/site/c.
ckLQKbOVLkK6E/b.7547173/k.9F58/Cost_Survey.htm).3

Illustration of a Cost Analysis for Intact Family Services

Ongoing case management begins after the investigation of the reported maltreatment is completed. This
program is bound by the completion of the investigation and the transfer of responsibility to a case manager.
These services typically end when it is determined that the family has the resources, knowledge, and strengths
to continue safely caring for the child(ren) without child welfare involvement so the case may be safely closed.
Services may also end with the removal of the child(ren) from the home and placement into foster care.
One unit of five case managers at a central office within this county-administered, public child welfare
agency is assigned to serving intact families. This unit consists of one supervisor and five case managers,
or six full-time equivalents (FTEs). These five case managers have a maximum capacity for serving 12
families each for a total team capacity of 60 families that can be served at any one time. The remaining
units consist of two investigations units (2 supervisors and 10 investigators, or 12 FTEs) and two foster
care and adoption units (2 supervisors and 10 case managers, or 12 FTEs). In addition, the personnel who
provide the infrastructure, management, and administrative services (30 FTEs) are also housed at this site.
Therefore, the intact family services unit represents 10% of all the FTEs.

2
3

See the Appendix for the program components and resources identified for the illustration.
Copyright restrictions on the use of these instruments may apply. They are noted here as examples only.

6 | Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau

BU I L

D I NG E V I

DE

NC

 I N FO R M I N G P

OL

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

CY

CT

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

NC

Collect Data on Resource Allocation

Once the evaluator has information about resource

costs, he or she needs to determine how much of
each resource is used in providing the individual
components or activities that compose the program.
Because personnel often represent the main resource
used in providing child welfare services, it is particularly
important to understand how much staff time is used
to deliver a program or service, and how that time is
allocated across the components of the program or
service. In addition, data on how much time staff spend
serving individual clients, if available, can help the
evaluator identify differences in costs across families
or types of families.
The evaluator can collect data on how staff use their
time prospectively through time diaries or retrospectively
through the use of interviews, focus groups, or surveys. The
approach selected depends on the priorities for the cost
analysis and the time and resources available to conduct it.

DE

D I NG E V I

Accounting records will not likely include resources

that are donated to the program, such as volunteer time.
The evaluator conducting the cost analysis can estimate
the value of these resources using information on market
prices for similar resources. For instance, the value of
volunteer labor may be estimated using typical wages for
the position held by a volunteer. An example of typical
wages can be found on the United States Department of
Labor-Bureau of Labor Statistics Web page (http://www.
bls.gov/bls/blswage.htm). Similarly, the value of office
space donated to a program may be estimated using
commercial lease rates in a local area. This approach is
appropriate because providers of a similar program may
have to pay these costs if donations are not available.

BU I L

Data collection on resource costs must account for

resources that are shared among multiple programs.
If the resource is shared, only the portion used by the
program being analyzed should be included in the cost
estimate. For example, if multiple programs share an
office, include only the value of the space used by the
program that is the focus of the cost analysis.

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&
COST WORKGROUP

Illustration of a Cost Analysis for Intact

Family Services
The evaluator opted to collect cost data
prospectively. Also, the agency leadership
elected to examine the costs of the program
over a one-year period. The program staff were
asked to record how they used their time during
four one-week periods over a year. Collecting
time-use data at multiple points may help the
evaluator capture differing patterns in time
use over the course of a year. Program staff
recorded their time on a log each work day,
allocating time to key activities in 15-minute
increments. The staff completed the sheet daily
over the course of each week under review.
Prospective data collection requires that respondents
record regularly how they spend their time during a
specific period or throughout the length of an intervention (Anderson, Bowland, Cartwright, & Bassin, 1998;
Corso & Filene, 2009; Yates, 1999). Each day, staff might
enter on a log the amount of time they spent on specific
program activities, such as visits with families, traveling
to visits, advocacy on behalf of families, and writing
case notes. (See the Appendices for examples of key
activities.) The log might also require staff to indicate
the client who received the service. (Examples of time
logs can be found in the National Institute on Drug
Abuse (NIDA) manual, Measuring and Improving Costs,
Cost-Effectiveness, and Cost-Benefit for Substance Abuse
Treatment Programs [Yates, 1999], available at: http://
archives.drugabuse.gov/IMPCOST/IMPCOSTIndex.html.)
Under retrospective data collection methods,
respondents are asked to recall how they spent their
time during a particular period (such as the previous
day or week) or how they generally spend their time.
These questions can be posed to program staff through
interviews, focus groups, or surveys.
Program managers or evaluators planning a cost
analysis must weigh the various advantages and disadvantages of prospective and retrospective methods
for collecting data on staff time use. Prospective data
collection allows an evaluator to collect detailed data on
how staff use their time and other resources in providing
services to individual clients. On the other hand, it can
place a high burden on program staff members, who

Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau| 7

 I N FO R M I N G P

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

OL

CY

CT

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

COST WORKGROUP

must complete logs or diaries regularly over an extended

period, and sustaining consistent staff participation
over time may be difficult. Retrospective reports of time
use are less burdensome for staff but are also generally
believed to be less accurate than prospective time diaries,
because responses to questions are considered more susceptible to error. In particular, respondents may over-report
time spent in socially desirable activities, have difficulty
recalling their activities during the reference period, or find
it challenging to report how they spend their time.

Estimate the Value of Indirect Costs

Indirect costs (sometimes called overhead costs) are

not directly associated with a specific program or
service. They may include administrative functions
that are shared across programs and services, such as
training, accounting, human resources, and information
technology, or costs related to overall agency
management. Sometimes expenditures for facilities,
utilities, or equipment are considered indirect costs.4

Illustration of a Cost Analysis for Intact

Family Services
To estimate the proportion of overhead costs
attributable to in-home services, we multiply
the agency budget for these indirect services
by the proportion of the agency staff allocated
to intact family services (see the Appendix for
more detail). Because the intact services unit
represents 10% of the agency FTEs, we attribute
10%, or $176,000, of the total agency indirect
costs ($1,760,000) to the intact family services.
By adding the key direct service component
costs and the indirect costs, we can determine
the total program costs for a 12-month period.
Based on this example, the total program cost
for a 12-month period is $537,250.

Agencies use various methods for determining indirect

costs. A common approach is to establish an indirect
cost rate (a percentage) and apply this rate to direct
costs, such as salaries. Some agencies establish separate
indirect cost rates for overhead costs and general and
administrative costs. Indirect cost rates may be applied
to different combinations of direct costs: salaries only;
salaries and fringe benefits; or salaries, fringe benefits,
and other direct costs.
It is important to include indirect costs in a cost
analysis because these resources support the delivery of
program services. Total indirect costs may be estimated
by using an agencys established indirect cost rate and
applying it to direct costs, following the same procedure
used by the agency. Another option is to use the total
indirect costs an agency has calculated for a program
during the period covered by the cost analysis.
It is also possible to create an estimate of a programs
indirect costs when an established indirect cost rate is
unavailable. To do so, the evaluator would itemize the
resources that are generally considered under indirect
costs, determine the total costs of these resources to the
agency during the analysis period, and allocate costs to
a program based on the programs share of an agencys
direct costs. If costs are analyzed at the participant level,
a programs indirect costs can be allocated based on the
share of direct costs attributable to the individual participant (see the NIDA manual [Yates, 1999] for a complete
description of this approach).
The evaluator conducting the analysis should take
care not to double-count resources when collecting and
using data on indirect costs. For example, an organization may consider facilities to be an indirect cost and
allocate these costs to individual programs or projects
through an established indirect cost rate. When an
indirect cost rate is used in a cost analysis, the evaluator
should identify the specific types of costs covered under
this rate and reconcile this information with other cost
data collected.

In a cost-effectiveness or cost-benefit analysis, indirect costs may refer to the unintended or spillover costs a program creates, or to
productivity losses resulting from a persons participation in a treatment or intervention.

8 | Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau

BU I L

D I NG E V I

DE

NC

 I N FO R M I N G P

OL

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

CY

CT

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

NC

When comparing total costs across similar programs

or multiple sites of a single program, consider that
many factors can contribute to differences in total costs.
For example, programs may serve varying numbers of
participants or face different local costs for office space.
It is important to consider these differences in context.
Comparing costs is also beneficial for performance
management.
It may be helpful to examine how the proportions
of specific types of costs vary across programs or sites,
for example, by calculating and comparing personnel
costs or indirect/overhead costs as a percentage of total
costs. When making such comparisons, it is important to
consider how each program or sites setting and implementation may influence costs.

Estimate Costs of Individual Program

Components or Activities

To estimate the cost of individual program components

or activities, the evaluator conducting the cost analysis
can use information on resource costs and allocation.
The approaches available for estimating program
component costs depend on the information available
for the analysis.
Estimating component costs based on staff time use
and total program cost. One approach is to allocate
the total program cost among program components

DE

In presenting the total cost estimate, it may be helpful

to combine resource categories. For instance, all resources
related to facilities could be combined into a single
category, as could supplies and equipment. Doing so will
streamline the reporting of results.

D I NG E V I

Creating an estimate of total program or service costs using

the ingredient method involves summing the total costs of
each resource identified. Before creating this total, resource
costs should be adjusted to ensure that they represent
only those costs related to the program or service being
analyzed and the period covered by the analysis.

BU I L

Create an Estimate of Total Costs

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&
COST WORKGROUP

in the same proportions as staff report using their

time. Under this approach, the total value of each staff
members compensation can be divided among program
components or activities based on the percentage
of time the staff member reported spending on that
component or activity. The value of other resources can
then be allocated to program components based on
the overall proportion of time that staff report spending
on each component. This method provides a workable
overall estimate of program component costs but does
not provide insight into how these costs may vary
among program participants.
Estimating component costs based on cost per unit
of time. The cost evaluator can develop a more precise
estimate of program component costs if the analysis
includes detailed data on use of staff time and other
resources. In this case, the cost of each resource per
unit of time should be calculated (for example, the value
of an hour of a staff members time or the value of
an hour of facility use). This amount can be multiplied
by the number of hours that resource was used for a
particular component or activity to arrive at the cost
per component. The cost of resources for which timeuse data may not be available can then be allocated to
program components in the same proportions as total
staff time.

Illustration of a Cost Analysis for Intact

Family Services
Using the cost-per-period of participation
method, we identified a total of 550
participant-months (sum of families served each
month for the 12-month period under review).
With annual costs of $537,250, cost-per-period
of participation is $977 ($537,250/550). To
estimate the cost per family, we multiply the
cost-per-period of participation ($977) by the
average number of months a family participates
in the program (6 months), or $977 x 6, for an
estimated cost per family of $5,862.

Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau| 9

 I N FO R M I N G P

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

OL

CY

CT

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

COST WORKGROUP

Estimate Costs Per Participant

Estimating costs per participant is critical for making
analytic comparisons across programs with similar goals.
It also provides a foundation for cost-benefit or costeffectiveness analyses at the individual level. As with other
elements of the cost analysis, the approach for estimating
per-participant costs and the accuracy of these estimates
depend on the data available for the analysis. To estimate
costs per participant, some data on program participation
must be available (at a minimum, the number of people
served during the cost analysis period).
Average cost method. One approach is simply to divide
total program costs for the cost period by the number
of participants during the period. However, this method
is generally not preferred, because it does not take into
account such factors as service intensity or duration,
which can vary across participants and affect actual costs
and program outcomes.
Cost per core service. Another approach is to estimate the
cost of delivering a core program service; for example, a
home visit. This method relies on data indicating the number
of times a service is delivered during the cost period and the
number of times an individual participant receives it. The
total program cost can then be divided by the number of
visits provided, producing a cost per home visit delivered, for
example. This value would then be multiplied by the number
of home visits received by an average family during the
entire duration of their participation, producing an estimate
of the cost per family. While this approach may provide
information on how costs vary among participants, it can be
difficult to define a programs core service.
Average cost per period. A third approach relies on
estimating the cost to serve a participant for a specific
period of time, such as a day, week, or month. This
approach uses data on the length of program participation
for individual participants. Total program costs during the
cost analysis period (for example, a year) are divided by the
total number of days, weeks, or months that all participants
spent in the program during the cost analysis periodthat
is, the sum, across all participants, of the number of days,
weeks, or months each was enrolled in the program. (For
programs of short duration, the evaluator might calculate a
cost per participant day or week.)

number of days, weeks, or months a participant stays in

the program from entry through exit. When calculating
the average duration of participation, evaluators should
include all days, weeks, or months between entry and
exit, even if entry or exit occurs before or after the cost
analysis period. The evaluator can use data on the range
of length of participation to get a sense of how costs vary
among participants. This method produces a reasonably
accurate estimate of per-participant costs, but it does not
account for variation in the intensity of services across
participantsthat is, whether individual participants use
more or less staff time or other resources.
Cost per unit of activity. Collecting data on direct
service provision at the participant level allows for more
sophisticated analysis of per-participant costs. In contrast to
the methods for calculating per-participant costs described
above, this approach does not start with a total cost period
amount. Rather, costs of program resources per unit of time
are multiplied by the amount of time individual participants
use these resources to develop an estimate of perparticipant costs. For example, an evaluator could ask staff
providing direct services to complete time diaries indicating
the number of hours spent delivering services to individual
clients. The evaluator could then identify the cost for an hour
of each staff members time. Using information about the
number of hours a client spends in the program or service,
the evaluator could calculate the cost of direct service
provision per participant (number of hours x cost of staff
time per hour). To create an estimate of non-personnel costs
per participant, the cost of other resources could be divided
equally among participants or allocated in proportion to the
number of hours a participant receives services.
Estimates of per-participant costs developed in this
way would support analysis of how costs vary among
participants with different characteristics. In addition,
they can be averaged across participants, if average costs
are of interest. In general, compared to other methods,
this approach produces an estimate that is likely to be
more precise (as long as data collection procedures are
sound), but it also involves a greater burden in terms of
the data required. The NIDA manual provides additional
detail on calculating per-participant costs in this way.

To calculate the average cost per participant, the cost

per day, week, or month is multiplied by the average

10 | Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau

$$

BU I L

D I NG E V I

DE

NC

 I N FO R M I N G P

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

R EN

ST
E
NC

If any assumptions about the value of resources were

made during the cost analysis, these assumptions should
also be tested by varying them to assess the effect on
cost estimates. An evaluator might also conduct a sensitivity analysis by varying one cost element at a time and
determining the effect on the cost estimate. For example,
an evaluator might explore how changes in staff compensation influence estimates of per-participant costs.
This kind of analysis could provide information on the
implications of hiring staff with different education levels
(and associated differences in average compensation).

DE

Cost analyses should include tests of whether and

how results change with adjustments in assumptions
or cost parameters. These tests are known as sensitivity
analyses.

CHILD WELFARE

EVALUATION

D I NG E V I

Conduct Sensitivity Analyses and Examine

Cost Variation

RESEARCH&
BU I L

OL

CY

CT

COST WORKGROUP

> Conclusion
Cost analysis that employs the methods outlined in
this guide is doable. Cost analysis is important as part
of a comprehensive approach to evaluating programs,
and it can serve as a foundation for more rigorous cost
evaluation such as cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit
analyses.

Examining how estimates of per-participant costs vary

across programs, sites, and groups of participants is also
likely to be informative. These kinds of analyses can help
identify factors that drive cost variation by exploring relationships between observed costs and the characteristics
of program, site, and participant groups.
In general, estimates expressed in terms of a single
figure may be misleading to decision-makers. A programs true costs are more likely to be within a range
that may be affected by individual cost components and
their unit values.
$$

Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau| 11

 I N FO R M I N G P

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

OL

CY

CT

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

COST WORKGROUP

> Glossary
Cost Analysis: A thorough description of the type and
amount of all resources used to produce services
(Yates, 1999).
Cost-Benefit Analysis: Analysis that attempt[s] to
calculate the actual costs of delivering services and
the monetary value of improving particular outcomes
for children and families, and to measure whether the
benefits exceed the costs (https://www.childwelfare.
gov/preventing/evaluating/cost_benefit.cfm).
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Analysis that attempt[s]
to determine which practices and policies protect the
greatest number of children for the lowest price, by
identifying key measures of program effectiveness
(outcomes) and comparing different strategies to
affect those outcomes (https://www.childwelfare.
gov/preventing/evaluating/cost_effect.cfm).
Costs: Value (typically monetary) of the amounts of
different types of resources consumed to implement the
program (Yates, 2009).
Direct Costs: Those costs that can be assigned to a
particular case or program, for example, the monetary
value of a case workers person-time used to counsel a
client (Bell, 2011).
Fixed Costs: Costs whose total remains constant (within
a relevant range) even though the volume of the activity
may vary (http://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/programs/
nhdsp_program/economic_evaluation/index.htm).
Impact Evaluation: The purpose of an impact evaluation
is to determine the extent to which the objectives of the
program or policy are accomplished and whether any
unintended effects could be identified (often thought of
as distal outcomes) (Theodoulou and Kofinis, 2004).
Indirect Costs: Costs that are not identified specifically
with a particular case or program, for example, the cost
of facilities (Bell, 2011).1
Outcome Evaluation: The purpose of an outcome
evaluation is to characterize the extent to which the
knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and practices have

changed for those individuals or entities who received

the intervention or who were targeted by the policy
compared to non-recipients (often thought of as
proximal outcomes) (Theodoulou & Kofinis, 2004).
Process Evaluation: The purpose of a process or
implementation evaluation is to characterize the process
through which an intervention or policy is implemented.
It focuses on inputs and outputs of the program,
quantifying the dosage of the intervention, the
implementation fidelity, and its ability to affect change
(Theodoulou & Kofinis, 2004).
Sensitivity Analysis: Examination of effects of varying
specific assumptions on costs, benefits, effectiveness,
and comparisons of these (Yates, 2009).
Variable Costs: Costs which vary with the level of
output and which respond proportionately to changes
in volume of activity (http://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/
programs/nhdsp_program/economic_evaluation/
index.htm).

> References and Resources

Anderson, D.W., Bowland, B.J., Cartwright, W.S., &
Bassin, G. (1998). Service-level costing of drug abuse
treatment. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment,
15(3), 201211.
Bell, J. (2011). Introduction to Cost Evaluation for
Child Welfare Programs [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved
from http://www.jbassoc.com/reports/section.
aspx?category=13.
Brodowski, M.L., & Filene, J.H. (2009). Engaging
program staff in economic evaluation: Lessons learned
and recommendations for practice. Protecting Children,
24(3), 70-77.
Boulatoff, C., & Jump, V.K. (2007). Blueprint of a cost
analysis approach for early intervention: Application
to a home visiting program to prevent child abuse and
neglect. Journal of Early Intervention, (30)1, 7384.
Centers for Disease Control (n.d.). Tutorials on Economic
Evaluation of Public Health Preparedness and Response
Efforts. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/owcd/
eet/Preface/Fixed/Preface.html.

In cost-benefit analysis or cost-effectiveness analysis, indirect costs

typically refer to productivity losses.

12 | Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau

BU I L

D I NG E V I

DE

NC

 I N FO R M I N G P

OL

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

CY

CT

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

COST WORKGROUP

BU I L

D I NG E V I

DE

NC

Chamberlain, P., Snowden, L.R., Padgett, C., Saldana, L.,

Roles, J., Holmes, L., & Landsverk, J. (2011). A strategy
for assessing costs of implementing new practices in
the child welfare system: Adapting the English cost
calculator in the United States. Administration and Policy
in Mental Health, 38(1), 24-31.

Lee, S., Aos, S., Drake, E., Pennucci, A., Miller, M., &
Anderson, L. (2012). Return on investment: Evidencebased options to improve statewide outcomes: Technical
appendix methods and user manual, April 2012
(Document No. 11-07-1201B). Olympia: Washington
State Institute for Public Policy.

Corso, P., & Filene, J.H. (2009). Programmatic cost

analysis of the family connections program. Protecting
Children, 24(3), 78-88.

Levin, H.M., & McEwan, P.J. (2001). Cost-effectiveness

analysis: Methods and applications. Second Edition,
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Corso, P., & Lutzker, J.R. (2006). The need for economic
analysis in research on child maltreatment. Child Abuse
and Neglect, 30(7), 727-738.

National Assembly on School-Based Health Care Cost

Survey. (n.d.). National Assembly on School-Based
Health Care. Retrieved from http://www.nasbhc.org/
site/c.ckLQKbOVLkK6E/b.7697107/apps/s/content.
asp?ct=10899821.

Drug abuse treatment cost analysis program. Retrieved

from http://datcap.com/index.htm.
Foster, E.M., Connor, T., & Nguyen, H. (2001). A
comparison of services delivered and costs incurred
in a system of care and traditional service system.
Unpublished paper presented at A System of Care for
Childrens Mental Health: Expanding the Research Base,
11th Annual Research Conference, Tampa, FL, 2001.
Goldhaber-Fiebert, J.D., Snowden, L.R., Wulczyn,
F., Landsverk, J., & Horwitz, S.M. (2011). Economic
evaluation research in the context of child welfare policy:
A structured literature review and recommendations.
Child Abuse and Neglect, 35(9), 722-740.
Haddix, A.C., Corso, P. S., & Gorsky, R.D. (2003). Costs.
In A.C. Haddix, S.M. Teutsch, and P. A. Corso (Eds.),
Prevention Effectiveness: A Guide to Decision Analysis
and Economic Evaluation, 2nd Edition. London: Oxford
University Press.
Lee, S., Aos, S., Drake, E., Pennucci, A., Miller, M., &
Anderson, L. (2012). Return on investment: Evidencebased options to improve statewide outcomes, April
2012 (Document No. 12-04-1201). Olympia: Washington
State Institute for Public Policy.

Theodoulou, S.Z. & Kofinis, C. (2004). The art of the

game: Understanding American public policy making.
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Westat, Inc., Chapin Hall Center for Children, & James
Bell Associates (2002). Estimating child welfare service
costs: Methods developed for the evaluation of family
preservation and reunification programs. Retrieved from
http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/fampres02.
Yates, B.T. (2009). Cost-inclusive evaluation: A banquet
of approaches for including costs, benefits, and costeffectiveness and cost-benefit analyses in your next
evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 32(1),
52-54. Retrieved from http://brianyates.net/info/
yates_banquet_of_approaches.pdf.
Yates, B.T. (1999). National Institute on Drug Abuse
(NIDA), Measuring and improving costs, costeffectiveness, and cost-benefit for substance abuse
treatment programs. Retrieved from http://archives.
drugabuse.gov/IMPCOST/IMPCOSTIndex.html.

Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau| 13

This page intentionally left blank.

 I N FO R M I N G P

OL

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

CY

CT

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

COST WORKGROUP

BU I L

D I NG E V I

DE

NC

> Appendices
In the following two appendices, we provide fictitious data for the cost analyses of two child welfare services. These
illustrations are completely fictitious and solely for the purpose of demonstrating how a cost analysis would be
conducted: first, by identifying the key program components and activities; second, by specifying all the resources; and
third, by adding value to all those resources before calculating the total cost of the program.

Appendix 1. Illustration of Cost Analysis of an Intact Family Services Program

Key Components
Category

Activities

Direct services to
families

Planning and preparation:

Identifying contact goals and objectives
Case planning

Direct services to
families

Contact with families:

Case planning discussion/review
Strengths and needs reassessments
Visits to monitor progress and provide support, including visits with individual family
members (for example, seeing a child at school, making a home visit to discuss
progress with the parent)
Other types of contact with the family (not necessarily in person); e.g., phone, e-mail,
or text

Direct services to
families

Case management:
Frontline supervision, case assignment, and case consultation
Time spent in court and/or interacting with attorneys, if applicable
Attendance at team meetings
Communication between the case manager and the original investigator

Direct services to
families

Services linkage and contacts with collaterals:

Identification and referrals for additional services
Information gathering (e.g., school records, medical records) and contacts with other
service providers

Direct services to
families

Travel/transportation to complete assigned duties

Direct services to
families

Case documentation:
Case notes
Case plan
Referral forms (for families to services)
Court reports, if applicable
Documentation or paperwork related to expenses and other internal agency requests
(e.g., paperwork related to case opening/closure/transfer to out-of-home placement)

Direct services to
families

Other activities depending on an agencys practice model and service delivery array

Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau| 15

 I N FO R M I N G P

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

OL

CY

CT

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

COST WORKGROUP

Category (continued)

Activities

Management and
administration1

Middle management planning, consultation, and supervision, including review and approval
of case documentation

Management and
administration

Coordination and facilitation of team meetings

Management and
administration

General counsel/legal services

Management and
administration

Internal reporting and communication (e.g., agency staff meetings to communicate

relevant information, meetings to review data for continuous improvement)

Management and
administration

Human resources (e.g., staff recruitment and selection, benefits management)

Management and
administration

Training (e.g., training personnel who are providing new-hire training and ongoing staff
training and/or coaching, curriculum development, and implementation)

Management and
administration

Information Technology:
Staff to support the use of technology for case documentation, such as laptops,
tablets, and cell phones
Staff to manage case management/information systems
Staff to develop and release program output and outcomes reports

Management and
administration

External reporting and communication (e.g., reports/communication to funders/legislators

and other stakeholders, reporting to Federal Government)

Management and
administration

General program management, including accounting, contracting, policy and planning, and
quality assurance

In some financial models, this key component may be separated into two components management and administrative services and
infrastructure or indirect services.

Resources
Personnel (proportion
of salaries, benefits,
and taxes applicable to
intact family services)

Examples

Case managers
Case assistants, if applicable
Frontline supervisors
Program management
Family team meeting facilitators and coordinators
Quality assurance staff
Agency leadership
Agency legal counsel, if court involvement
Accounting staff
Information technology staff (to maintain and develop the case management system
or other reporting system)
Human resources staff
Training staff
Policy and planning staff
Contracts and procurement staff
Clerical staff
Value of any donated/volunteer labor

16 | Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau

BU I L

D I NG E V I

DE

NC

 I N FO R M I N G P

OL

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

BU I L

D I NG E V I

DE

NC

Resources (continued)

CY

CT

COST WORKGROUP

Examples

Contracted services

Professional and paraprofessional services, if applicable (e.g., mental health or substance

abuse screening consultants, homemaker services contracted or hired directly by the child
welfare agency, available to all units)

Materials and supplies

Proportion of these costs allocated to the intact family program (e.g., paper, pens, other
office supplies)

Depreciation costs of
durable equipment

Cars, smartphones, computers/laptops, office furniture

Facilities/office space

Proportion of rent and other building costs allocated to the intact family program

Travel

Mileage:
For visits with families
To service providers on behalf of families
To training
For travel to court hearings, if applicable
Vouchers or reimbursements to families for travel

Utilities

Proportion of these costs allocated to the intact family program

The following data-collection instrument captures all costs for personnel (that is, the dedicated supervisor and five case
managers) and non-personnel resources of the program during the period of analysis.

Resources

Total Annual Cost

Intact case manager salary

$225,000
($45K x 5 case managers)

Intact case manager benefits and taxes

$56,250
($11,250 x 5)

Intact supervisor salary

$60,000

Intact supervisor benefits and taxes

$15,000

Travel expenditures

$5,000

Materials and suppliespaper, pens, etc. (proportion of costs applicable to

program)

$1,500

Annual costs of durable equipmentdesks, printers, cars, etc. (proportion of

costs applicable to program)

$1,250

Annual lease/mortgage payment (proportion of costs applicable to program)

$3,000

Utilitieselectricity, gas, water, etc. (proportion of costs applicable to program)

$1,500

Salaries, benefits, and taxes for all other personnel (allocated based on
proportion of time spent on intact family services)

$168,750

Total

$537,250

Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau| 17

 I N FO R M I N G P

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

OL

CY

CT

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

COST WORKGROUP

Indirect Resources

Total Agency Annualized

Indirect (Overhead) Costs

Portion Assigned to
Intact Family Services

Annual costs of durable equipment

$12,500

$1,250
($12,500 x .10)

Annual lease/mortgage payment

$30,000

$3,000
($30,000 x .10)

Utilities

$15,000

$1,500
($15,000 x .10)

$1,687,500

$168,750
($1,687,500 x .10)

Salaries, benefits, and taxes for all other personnel

18 | Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau

BU I L

D I NG E V I

DE

NC

 I N FO R M I N G P

OL

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

CY

CT

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

COST WORKGROUP

BU I L

D I NG E V I

DE

NC

Appendix 2. Illustration of Cost Analysis of a Home Visiting Program

Key Components
Category

Activities

Direct services to
enrolled families

Initial screening and assessment

Assessing client needs
Analyzing family situations
Collecting information needed to develop service delivery plans

Direct services to
enrolled families

Home visit preparation and delivery

Preparing for home visits, including developing service delivery plans and
communicating with clients to schedule visits
Delivery of home visits, including providing counseling and support, demonstrating or
modeling skills, conducting periodic screenings and assessments, and other activities

Direct services to
enrolled families

Case management and service linkage

Arranging and coordinating services on behalf of a family, including advocacy on
behalf of a client
Consulting with other staff and providers
Identifying appropriate resources for families

Direct services to
enrolled families

Services/activities other than home visits

Providing or participating in services other than home visits, such as parent group
meetings

Direct services to
enrolled families

Case documentation
Completing case notes and recording data to document services provided and client
status

Direct services to
enrolled families

Travel/transportation
Traveling to clients homes or other locations to provide services.
Transporting clients to locations outside their homes.

Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau| 19

 I N FO R M I N G P

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

OL

CY

CT

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

COST WORKGROUP

Category (continued)

Activities

Management and
Administration

Outreach and recruitment

Communication informing other providers and potential participants about services
available

Management and
Administration

Eligibility determination and referral

Conducting screenings and assessments related to eligibility determinations and
enrolling clients; referring clients who cannot be served to other agencies

Management and
Administration

Staff recruitment
Recruiting and hiring program staff

Management and
Administration

Staff training
Providing or attending in-house or outside trainings that support delivery of services or
program operations

Management and
Administration

Staff supervision and consultation

Providing or receiving feedback and supervision; participating in staff meetings or
consultations related to service delivery

Management and
Administration

Fundraising
Grant-writing, fundraising, and leveraging funding

Management and
Administration

Planning and collaboration

Strategic planning and decision-making, participating in professional/community
committees, working with partners to align goals and strategies

Management and
Administration

External communication
Communicating with partners/stakeholders; building awareness or support for home
visiting programs among policymakers

Management and
Administration

Continuous quality improvement

Analyzing data to monitor program implementation and assess fidelity to the EvidenceBased Home-Visiting program model (not for program evaluation)

Management and
Administration

General management and administration

Budgeting and financial reporting, managing or negotiating contracts, and other
management and administrative functions and activities that do not belong under other
categories

20 | Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau

BU I L

D I NG E V I

DE

NC

 I N FO R M I N G P

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

NC

Materials and supplies

Office supplies
Computer software
Postage
Educational materials
Client support materials

Annual costs of durable

equipment

Cars
Computers/laptops
Office furniture

Other direct costs

Indirect/overhead costs

DE

Home visitors
Supervisors
Program management
Administrative and support staff
Volunteers

Contracted services

D I NG E V I

Travel

CHILD WELFARE

COST WORKGROUP

Examples

Personnel
(proportion of salaries/fringe
benefits attributable to work on
the home visiting program and
value of any volunteer labor)

Facilities/office space

RESEARCH&
BU I L

Resources

OL

CY

CT

Cost for facilities (whether owned/leased/donated) used by the home visiting program
Travel/mileage to conduct home visits or visit other service providers on
families behalf, or provide transportation to families
Travel to attend professional trainings
Costs for professional or technical consultants to the home visiting program
Fees paid to home visiting model developers
Costs of staff training and professional development
Costs of shared administrative functions or other resources shared across programs

Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau| 21

 I N FO R M I N G P

G T H EN I N G

PR
A

I CE

OL

CY

CT

CHILD WELFARE

RESEARCH&

ST

R EN

EVALUATION

COST WORKGROUP

Example cost estimate for one year of home visiting program operation
Resources
Personnel
Materials and supplies

Annual Cost
$406,800
$35,500

Annual costs of equipment

$4,800

Facilities/office space

$8,500

Travel

$22,500

Contracted services

$11,500

Other direct costs

Indirect/overhead costs

$6,400

In this example, we estimate per-participant costs using the average

duration of enrollment in the home visiting program and the cost per
day of family enrollment during the cost study period. Using data on
program participation, we begin by determining the average length
of enrollment between program entry and exit for 125 families served
at some point during the cost study period. (Days enrolled before
and after the cost period are included in our calculation of average
duration.) We calculate the average length of enrollment per family
to be 217 days. We also calculate the total number of days of family
enrollment during the cost study period (that is, the number of days
each family was enrolled during the cost study period, summed across
all enrolled families). The total number of days of family enrollment is
24,192.

$80,750

A cost per day of family enrollment is calculated by dividing total

annual costs by the total number of days of family enrollment during
Total
$576,750
the cost study period ($576,750/24,192). Therefore, the cost per day
is $23.84. To estimate the average cost per family, the cost per day is
multiplied by the average number of days between a familys program entry and exit ($23.84 x 217). We estimate that the
program costs $5,173 to serve a family, on average.
In addition to calculating average costs per family, we may also calculate: (1) the range in cost per family (by determining
the minimum and maximum number of days of family enrollment and multiplying these amounts by the cost per day of
enrollment); and (2) the median cost per family (by determining the median number of days families were enrolled and
multiplying this amount by the cost per day of family enrollment). These measures will provide an indicator of variation in
costs among families served.

22 | Child Welfare Research & Evaluation Workgroups are a Project of the Children's Bureau

BU I L

D I NG E V I

DE

NC

This page intentionally left blank.