Evaluating the Cost-Effectiveness of a Quality Reporting Project

Report sponsors often want to know whether the reporting project was a good use of limited resources. While it is often difficult and inappropriate to try to justify the expense of an entire quality reporting project based on quantifiable results, it is feasible and useful to compare the costs and results achieved through specific strategies and tactics.

One area where comparing costs and results can be very helpful is in marketing and promotion. For example, let's say you are trying to determine which of several advertising strategies was most effective at conveying your message and getting potential users to your Web site. You can use free “Web analytic” tools from common search sites to identify:

  • Which particular ads and sources are driving people to your site?
  • Which pages in your report are people accessing most often?
  • What’s the cost for each person who “clicks through” to your Web site?

Example: Evaluation of a Web-Based Marketing Campaign

Title: CalHospitalCompare.org
Sponsor: California HealthCare Foundation
URL: Now part of http://www.calqualitycare.org/.

In 2008, the California HealthCare Foundation (CHCF) assessed the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of several Web-based tactics used to promote awareness and use of the CalHospitalCompare Web site (which is now part of CalQualityCare.org). Learn about this evaluation and what CHCF learned.

Source: California HealthCare Foundation, Available at http://www.calqualitycare.org/.

Also in "What You Can Evaluate"

Page last reviewed November 2018
Page originally created February 2015
Internet Citation: Evaluating the Cost-Effectiveness of a Quality Reporting Project. Content last reviewed November 2018. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. https://www.ahrq.gov/talkingquality/assess/what-you-evaluate/cost-effectiveness.html
Back To Top