| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | AA | AB | AC | AD | AE | AF | AG | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Burkina Faso RCT | Burkina Faso, scaled | 5 West African countries | Guinea | Benin | Togo | Sierra Leone | Niger | notes | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
2 | Total units of value from CYPs due to radio messaging campaigns | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3 | Percent of women using modern contraception without radio messaging campaigns | 29.5% | 29.5% | 29.5% | 29.5% | 29.5% | 29.5% | 29.5% | 29.5% | (not directly used in calculations, for reference only) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
4 | Increase in modern contraceptive use due to radio messaging campaigns (pp) | 5.9% | 5.9% | 5.9% | 5.9% | 5.9% | 5.9% | 5.9% | 5.9% | (not directly used in calculations, for reference only) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
5 | Number of additional women using contraception due to donation | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6 | Program cost per additional woman using contraception | $85 | $15 | $21 | $23 | $18 | $25 | $31 | $16 | See "Sample costs and coverage" sheet | |||||||||||||||||||||||
7 | Government contraceptives provision cost per additional woman using contraception | $20 | $20 | $20 | $20 | $20 | $20 | $20 | $20 | See "Government costs and savings" sheet | |||||||||||||||||||||||
8 | Government savings from avoided pregnancies per additional woman using contraception | -$7 | -$7 | -$7 | -$7 | -$7 | -$7 | -$7 | -$7 | See "Government costs and savings" sheet | |||||||||||||||||||||||
9 | Net cost per additional couple-year of protection | $65 | $19 | $23 | $24 | $21 | $26 | $30 | $19 | Calc (not used in calculations, for interpretation only) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
10 | Arbitrary donation | $100,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 | Arbitrary | |||||||||||||||||||||||
11 | Number of additional women using contraception due to donation | 1,178 | 6,524 | 4,704 | 4,268 | 5,603 | 3,967 | 3,180 | 6,333 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
12 | Total government spending | $15,660 | $86,738 | $62,539 | $56,744 | $74,498 | $52,744 | $42,275 | $84,194 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
13 | Total spent by all contributors | $115,660 | $186,738 | $162,539 | $156,744 | $174,498 | $152,744 | $142,275 | $184,194 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
14 | Benefit - couple-year of protection (CYP) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
15 | CYPs per additional woman using contraception | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.5 | Assumption | |||||||||||||||||||||||
16 | Total CYPs due to radio messaging campaigns | 1767 | 9786 | 7056 | 6402 | 8405 | 5951 | 4770 | 9499 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
17 | Value assigned to one CYP | 0.67 | 0.67 | 0.67 | 0.67 | 0.67 | 0.67 | 0.67 | 0.67 | Rough guess | |||||||||||||||||||||||
18 | Total units of value from CYPs due to radio messaging | 1,186 | 6,566 | 4,734 | 4,296 | 5,640 | 3,993 | 3,200 | 6,374 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
19 | Initial results | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
20 | Initial cost per CYP | $65 | $19 | $23 | $24 | $21 | $26 | $30 | $19 | Calc (not used in calculations, for interpretation only) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
21 | Units of value generated per dollar spent | 0.010 | 0.035 | 0.029 | 0.027 | 0.032 | 0.026 | 0.022 | 0.035 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
22 | Initial cost-effectiveness estimate in multiples of cash transfers | 3.0 | 10.2 | 8.5 | 8.0 | 9.4 | 7.6 | 6.5 | 10.1 | Calc, cash transfer value based on GiveDirectly CEA | |||||||||||||||||||||||
23 | Adjustments | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
24 | Internal validity adjustment | 50% | 50% | 50% | 50% | 50% | 50% | 50% | 50% | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
25 | External validity adjustment | 75% | 75% | 75% | 75% | 75% | 75% | 75% | 75% | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
26 | Adjusted total CYPs due to radio messaging campaigns | 663 | 3,670 | 2,646 | 2,401 | 3,152 | 2,232 | 1,789 | 3,562 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
27 | Adjusted total units of value from CYPs due to radio messaging campaigns | 445 | 2,462 | 1,775 | 1,611 | 2,115 | 1,497 | 1,200 | 2,390 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
28 | Results after adjustments | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
29 | Adjusted increase in modern contraceptive use due to radio messaging campaigns (pp) | 2.2% | 2.2% | 2.2% | 2.2% | 2.2% | 2.2% | 2.2% | 2.2% | Calc (not directly used in calculations, for reference only) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
30 | Adjusted cost per CYP | $175 | $51 | $61 | $65 | $55 | $68 | $80 | $52 | Calc (not used in calculations, for interpretation only) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
31 | Adjusted units of value generated per dollar spent | 0.004 | 0.013 | 0.011 | 0.010 | 0.012 | 0.010 | 0.008 | 0.013 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
32 | Adjusted cost-effectiveness estimate in multiples of cash transfers | 1.1 | 3.8 | 3.2 | 3.0 | 3.5 | 2.8 | 2.5 | 3.8 | Calc, cash transfer value based on GiveDirectly CEA | |||||||||||||||||||||||
33 | Leverage/Funging adjustment | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
34 | Total expenditure attributable to different actors | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
35 | Sample charity | $100,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
36 | Domestic government | $15,660 | $86,738 | $62,539 | $56,744 | $74,498 | $52,744 | $42,275 | $84,194 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
37 | Total expenditure | $115,660 | $186,738 | $162,539 | $156,744 | $174,498 | $152,744 | $142,275 | $184,194 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
38 | Counterfactual value of spending from domestic government (units of value per dollar) | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.005 | Based on our CEA, using weighted average of 80% health, 10% education, 10% social security | |||||||||||||||||||||||
39 | Probability of scenarios in absence of charity spending | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
40 | Scenario 1: Government costs would replace charity's costs | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | Best guess | |||||||||||||||||||||||
41 | Scenario 2: Government financial costs would stay the same | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | Best guess | |||||||||||||||||||||||
42 | Scenario 3: Distributions would go unfunded | 90% | 90% | 90% | 90% | 90% | 90% | 90% | 90% | Best guess | |||||||||||||||||||||||
43 | Expected change in government spending on the program in absence of charity's spending | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
44 | Scenario 1: Government costs would replace charity's costs | $100,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
45 | Scenario 2: Government financial costs would stay the same | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
46 | Scenario 3: Distributions would go unfunded | -$15,660 | -$86,738 | -$62,539 | -$56,744 | -$74,498 | -$52,744 | -$42,275 | -$84,194 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
47 | Units of value generated by changes in amount of government spending on the program in absence of charity's spending | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
48 | Scenario 1: Government costs would replace charity's costs | 384 | 1,319 | 1,092 | 1,028 | 1,212 | 980 | 844 | 1,298 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
49 | Scenario 2: Government financial costs would stay the same | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
50 | Scenario 3: Distributions would go unfunded | -60 | -1,144 | -683 | -583 | -903 | -517 | -357 | -1,093 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
51 | Units of value generated by changes in amount of funding spent on counterfactual programs by government in absence of charity's spending | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
52 | Scenario 1: Government costs would replace charity's costs | -507 | -507 | -507 | -507 | -507 | -507 | -507 | -507 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
53 | Scenario 2: Government financial costs would stay the same | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
54 | Scenario 3: Distributions would go unfunded | 79 | 440 | 317 | 288 | 378 | 267 | 214 | 427 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
55 | Net units of value created by changes in spending by government in absence of charity's spending | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
56 | Scenario 1: Government costs would replace charity's costs | -123 | 812 | 585 | 521 | 705 | 473 | 337 | 791 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
57 | Scenario 2: Government financial costs would stay the same | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
58 | Scenario 3: Distributions would go unfunded | 19 | -704 | -366 | -295 | -525 | -250 | -142 | -666 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
59 | Net units of value created by charity's spending | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
60 | Scenario 1: Government costs would replace charity's costs | 507 | 507 | 507 | 507 | 507 | 507 | 507 | 507 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
61 | Scenario 2: Government financial costs would stay the same | 384 | 1,319 | 1,092 | 1,028 | 1,212 | 980 | 844 | 1,298 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
62 | Scenario 3: Distributions would go unfunded | 365 | 2,023 | 1,458 | 1,323 | 1,737 | 1,230 | 986 | 1,963 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
63 | Results after leverage/funging adjustment | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
64 | Total units of value generated, after accounting for leverage/funging | 379 | 1,871 | 1,363 | 1,242 | 1,614 | 1,158 | 938 | 1,818 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
65 | Units of value generated per dollar spent by charity | 0.004 | 0.019 | 0.014 | 0.012 | 0.016 | 0.012 | 0.009 | 0.018 | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
66 | Cost-effectiveness estimate in multiples of cash transfers (adjusted, after accounting for leverage/funging) | 1.1 | 5.4 | 4.0 | 3.6 | 4.7 | 3.4 | 2.7 | 5.3 | Calc, cash transfer value based on GiveDirectly CEA | |||||||||||||||||||||||
67 | Change in cost-effectiveness from leverage/funging (%) | -1% | 42% | 25% | 21% | 33% | 18% | 11% | 40% | Calc | |||||||||||||||||||||||
68 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
69 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
70 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
71 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
72 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
73 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
74 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
75 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
76 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
77 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
78 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
79 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
80 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
81 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
82 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
83 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
84 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
85 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
86 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
87 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
88 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
89 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
90 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
91 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
92 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
93 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
94 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
95 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
96 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
97 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
98 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
99 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
100 |