Search results

The purpose of this paper is to describe the evolution of a common approach to impact assessment across the Global Libraries (GL) portfolio of grants. It presents an overview of two systems, the Performance Metrics (PMs) and the Common Impact Measurement System (CIMS). By providing a standard set of definitions and methods for use across countries, these systems enable grantees to collect data that can be compared and aggregated for the purpose of collective learning, improvement, accountability, and advocacy.

The PMs offer a standard methodology to collect library project performance management data, whereas the CIMS is a standard survey of public library users. The paper describes how the PM and CIMS data are being visualized and used, with examples of findings and lessons learned.

The paper cites examples of the type of PM and CIMS data available, with a focus on employment, gender, and case studies from Botswana and Indonesia. These highlights illustrate how libraries’ user demographics differ from other types of public internet access venues and how libraries can contribute to strong employment and growth.

The measurement systems rely on different partners collecting data for the same metrics across different countries; while each grantee adheres to a standard methodology, small procedural, and methodological differences are inevitable. Future research could focus on conducting similar studies elsewhere, outside the cohort of countries in the GL portfolio of grants.

The paper offers insights and lessons for library agencies or institutions interested in implementing a common measurement system. Recognizing that few library projects have the resources to track a comprehensive set of indicators, a case study is presented about how smaller initiatives can adapt these systems to their needs.

The indicators described in this paper enable public libraries to shift their focus from services provided to the outcomes they help individuals and communities realize, potentially increasing the potency of their programming and advocacy.

Common measurement systems are not new, but their application in the public library field is novel, as is the Data Atlas, a platform grantees use to compare results across metrics, track progress, and conduct advocacy.

Research has examined how new ventures strengthen local economic outcomes; however, limited research examines health-oriented ventures and their impact on social outcomes, including health outcomes. Increased VC investment in healthcare service start-ups signals more activity toward this end, and the need for further academic inquiry. We examine the relationship between these start-ups and county-level health outcomes, health factors, and hospital utilization.

Data on start-ups funded via institutional venture capital from PitchBook were merged with US county-level outcomes from the County Health Rankings and Area Health Resources Files for 2010 to 2019. We investigated how the number of VC-funded healthcare service start-ups, as well as a subset defined as innovative, were associated with county-level health measures. We used panel models with two-way fixed effects and Propensity Score Matched (PSM), controlling for demographics and socioeconomic factors.

Each additional VC-funded healthcare service start-up was related to a significant 0.01 percentage point decrease in diabetes prevalence (p < 0.01), a decrease of 1.54 HIV cases per 100,000 population (p < 0.1), a 0.02 percentage point decrease in obesity rates (p < 0.01), and a 0.03 percentage point decrease in binge drinking (p < 0.01). VC-funded healthcare service start-ups were not related to hospital utilization.

This work expands our understanding of how industry-specific start-ups, in this case healthcare start-ups, relate to positive social outcomes. The results underscore the importance of evidence-based evaluation, the need for expanded outcome measures for VC investment, and the possibilities for integration of healthcare services and entrepreneurship ecosystems.

This paper analyzes two external costs often associated with port development, cost to fisheries from marine dredge disposal and damages from air pollution, using estimates of development and operation for a proposed (but since cancelled) container port as a case study. For dredge disposal, a bio-economic model was used to assess short- and long-term and indirect (joodweb) damages to fisheries from marine disposal of clean sediments. In the case of air pollution, estimates of annual activity levels and emission coefficients are used to estimate incremental annual emissions of three key pollutants (NOx, HC and CO) for trucks, trains, yard vehicles, and vessels. These estimates allow for phasing in of strict new air pollution regulations. For both external costs, sensitivity analyses are used to reflect uncertainty. Estimates of shadow values in year 2002 dollars amount from $0.094 per cubic yard to $0.169 per cubic yard of clean dredged material for the selected disposal site and from $0.0584 per mile (jor current control standards) to $ 0. 0023 per mile (after phasing in of new regulations) for air pollution from heavy trucks.