On estimating the fiscal benefits of early intervention Leon Feinstein, Haron Chowdry and Kirsten Asmussen
By: Feinstein, Leon
.
Material type: 





Item type | Current location | Home library | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IEF | OP 280/2017/240 (Browse shelf) | Available | OP 280/2017/240 |
Browsing IEF Shelves Close shelf browser
No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | ||
OP 280/2016/238 Fiscal policy after the Referendum | OP 280/2017/239-1 Fiscal and other rules in EU economic governance | OP 280/2017/239-2 Does the structural budget balance guide fiscal policy pro - cyclically ? | OP 280/2017/240 On estimating the fiscal benefits of early intervention | OP 280/2018/243 National Institute Economic Review | OP 280/2018/244 National Institute Economic Review | OP 280/2018/245 National Institute Economic Review |
Disponible también en línea a través de la Biblioteca del Instituto de Estudios Fiscales. Resumen. Bibliografía.
In this paper we explain some of the difficulties of providing forecasts of the financial benefits of early interventionprogrammes, focussing onthose delivered during the early childhood period. We highlight the diversity of early intervention,and the complexity and multiplicity of outcomes. We summarise recent work at the Early Intervention Foundation to assess the evidence on the impacts of early intervention, recognising the diversity of approaches to delivery and the importanceof innovation and local practice as well as of rigorousapproaches to evaluating causal effects. We also describe new ways of assessingaccurately the local fiscal costs of late intervention and consider the implications of this for addressing the well-established barriers to investment in prevention. Our analysis brings to the fore gaps in the evidence from which even themost rigorous .gold-standard. research is not immune. These limitations preventthe production of an accurate and realistic cost-benefit ratio or net present value for the majority of programmes as delivered in practice. We suggest some paths towards a firmer foundation of evidence and a better alignment of evidence and policy.
There are no comments for this item.