Using social return on investment analysis to calculate the social impact of modified vehicles for people with disability

Abstract

Introduction Returning to driving is often a goal for people with acquired disabilities. Vehicle modifications make it possible for people with both acquired and lifelong disabilities to drive yet can be costly. There has been no financial evaluation of vehicle modifications in Australia or internationally. Methods A social return on investment analysis of vehicle modifications was undertaken. Primary data were collected via qualitative interviews with consumers and other stakeholders (e.g. driver‐trained occupational therapists, rehabilitation physicians, driving instructors, vehicle modifiers) (n = 23). Secondary data were collected from literature searches and used to identify suitable financial proxies and make estimations of the proportion of drivers with vehicle modifications experiencing each outcome. A co‐investment model was adopted to estimate social return on investment and payback period for funder and consumer. Five scenarios were developed to illustrate social return for low‐cost modifications (Scenario 1) through to high‐cost modifications (Scenario 5). Results Social return on investment ratios was positive for funder and consumer investment in all five scenarios. Social return on investment calculations based on co‐investment ranged from $17.32 for every $1 invested (Scenario 1) to $2.78 for every $1 invested (Scenario 5). Consumers' payback periods were between 5.4 and 7.1 months, and funders between 3.5 weeks and 2 years 8.4 months. Conclusion Vehicle modifications represent sound investments for both funders and consumers. Given the short payback periods, funders should reconsider age restrictions on vehicles considered suitable for modifications, especially for low‐ to medium‐cost modifications.

Accounting for Emotional Value: A Review in Disability Organizations

“…Less frequent in the studies is the impact on the community and its contribution to values such as inclusion or equality. 2,3,6,8,9,11,13,15,16,17,20,21,22,24,25,28 Self-reported level of perceived change (13,20,22,24,25); increased participation in domestic life and traveling (2,9,11,24); change in DEMQOL Q13 (16) Cost of counseling sessions or courses to develop personal autonomy (1,28); cost of renting a one bedroom flat (13); cost of a life insurance payout (15); cost of a special education technical assistant (25); cost of additional living expenses (9); feel in control: HACT Social Value Bank (16) Increase in confidence 1,3,8,9,15,16,17,18,20,21,22,23 Self-reported level of perceived change (8,17,…”

“…Cost of confidence building course (8,15); cost of therapy ( 1); HACT social value bank: high confidence ( 16)…”

“…Increase in self-esteem 1,8,13,15,16,18,21,22,27 Self-reported level of perceived change (1,8,13,22); change in DEMQOL Q5 ( 16)…”

“…Self-regulation of behaviors 17,25,26 Self-reported level of perceived change (17,25) Cost of counseling sessions (17,25) Improvement in family/social relations and decrease in feeling isolated 1,2,7,8,9,11,13,15,16,17,20,21,22,23,24,26,28,29 Self-reported level of perceived change (13,16,24); new contacts and social network participation (2,8,11,17,21,22); assessment using loneliness scale ( 11)…”

prekonomian di indonesia

“…(Kim & Ji, 2020) Using social return on investment analysis to calculate the social impact of modified vehicles for people with disability. (Hutchinson, et al, 2020) Kekurangan dan kelebihan SROI dapat membantu memfasilitasi diskusi strategis dan membantu memahami dan memaksimalkan nilai sosial yang dihasilkan dari kegiatan, membantu dalam membuat prioritas sumber daya yang tepat dalam mengelola hasil yang tak terduga, baik positif maupun negatif, memperlihatkan pentingnya bekerja dengan organisasi dan orang-orang yang berkontribusi dalam menciptakan perubahan. (Habibi & Syamilah, 2019)…”