The content of this publication represents the views of the author only and is her sole responsibility. The European Commission does not accept any responsibility for use that may be made of the information it contains. GUFOVA LOBBYING TOOL Karin Schönpflug The GUFOVA Lobbying Tool is based on the funding model developed in the GUFOVA project. Where the funding model is based on technical research and quantitative data, the lobbying tool is where the figures are put to work to provide a macro and micro economic context for investing in children’s services. On the macro side and based on the literature review and two rounds of expert interviews, the first part of the funding model shows the societal costs as well as the costs per child. Numbers for effected population are based on demographics (Eurostat 2019; 2012 for Bosnia and Herzegowina). The prevalence is based on estimations of occurrence by Habetha 2012 (14,5%) and are only based on the further estimation of extreme cases: 21%. The costs per child are then again based on Habetha (2012). Purchasing power parities (Eurostat 2019) are used for cross country comparison. The tool shows the results in local currencies (exchange rates: January 2021) for each country. The tool allows yearly corrections for inflation to keep these numbers up to date. The second part of the tool looks at the micro side and works with the identified beneficial factors for intervention programs, that were deducted from a second set of literature. Those have then been evaluated and weighted via expert estimations which is reflected in an estimation formula based on indexation which runs in the background of the tool. The efficiency of programs especially for kids in shelters is especially considered in those estimations. The second part of the funding model therefore connects the societal costs with benefits of intervention programs. The lobbying tool at work: In order to utilize the funding model for lobbying purposes users need to first input the country they are operating in. Secondly, they need to input their estimated program costs and the number of children reached in the program. Program characteristics can then be chosen which will result in estimating the effectiveness of the program. Results are displayed as monetary costs in national currencies as well as percentages of GDP for comparison. Benefits are displayed as monetary estimates and in numbers of children that will not experience adverse long-run effects. There is an option to add program costs per child reached, or simply total program costs. The lobbying tool is available online at the gufova webpage in the three project languages German, English and Danish, and it works for five countries: Austria, Bosnia and Herzegowina, Denmark, Germany and the UK. It can be downloaded and is immediately fully functional. Here is an example for the application. Assume, you are a practitioner working in a women’s shelter in Germany that also houses 65 children. You want to implement a program for children in your institution that will cost 3000 Euros per child. Your project has only three (for this example randomly chosen) features: You are planning to monitor the program’s effectiveness, you are intending to train mothers, the program aims to protect children from sexual violence. By adding that information into the Lobbying Tool you will get the following results: You will be able to tell policy makers: a) the cost of abuse per child in Germany is nearly 7.000 Euros yearly. This means, your 3.000 Euro project off-balances not even half of what child abuse and neglect costs on average per child per year. b) On an aggregate level yearly national costs of child abuse and neglect in Germany are 16 billion Euros or 0,5% of German GDP, which is a lot! c) Your specific program will cost 3.000 Euro; times 65 children (195 000 Euros in total). d) The benefits per child are estimated to equal 20.000 Euros (nearly 7 times the input) and will prevent national costs of an estimated 1,3 Million Euros, or the costs for 185 children for that year. The numbers are based on up-to date scientific research and the estimates are on the conservative side, which means that in real life the benefits will even be higher than has been calculated here. This should help convince policy makers that investing in children who are/were victims of domestic violence is not only the right ethical but also the economically efficient choice.
Enter the password to open this PDF file:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-