Matt's Part E

The dollar values being attached to the certain projects that were considered were not easy to put a price tag on. Placing a dollar value on human life was very hard to derive for the people considering the project. The relation between illness and income were complex for the project managers. The project managers came up with sources to help give those feasible numbers to attach to their projects to control diseases. The project managers looked at the microeconomic and macroeconomic studies to help determine the relationships of disease and economic outcomes on the individual level as well as a wide range of outcomes on a national level. The project managers used these studies to evaluate efficiency of health interventions in units so that they could place a monetary value on human life. When looking at the specific projects of HIVAIDs and Malaria, the project managers looked at several areas to help place dollar value on human life and specific units used in their project. Some of the sources used were macroeconomic impact of disease, studies of cost effectiveness of intervention programs, and evidence of costs and health benefits of large country scale programs already in place. For the basic health services project, the group analyzed regression models that measured the efficiency of health expenditures in generating health outcomes. Also, the group looked at the costs and health benefits of a package of interventions recommended in the 1993 World Development Report. To the project managers, a year of life lost was valued at 2003 per capita Gross National Income which was their ceiling ratio. The discount rates they came up with was 3%, and with their sensitivity analysis, they applied a 6% discount rate for the cost benefit project for HIV/AIDS, malaria, and basic health services.