PUBLIC INVESTMENT
Fiscal return
Additional tax receipts and evidenced expenditure reductions attributable to the programme, less its full cost. Budget-releasing savings must be distinguished from capacity released.
HUMAN POTENTIAL RETURN — JUSTICE
Invest in progression.
Measure the return.
HPR-J asks whether the incremental public value of better outcomes exceeds the full cost of the intervention. It evaluates a programme, never a person’s worth.
THREE VIEWS OF VALUE
Keep the investment
case transparent.
PEOPLE & SOCIETY
Wider social value
Income, wellbeing, family stability and reduced harm matter. Report separately and apply an appropriate economic methodology; do not simply add them to fiscal savings.
NCE AS A SUPPLIER
Commercial return
Licence income less development, delivery, support and compliance costs. Public savings are not automatically cash revenue or investor distributions for NCE.
AN EDITABLE DISCUSSION MODEL
What would have
to be true?
This one-year model uses invented assumptions to explain the method. Employment uplift and avoided reoffending are incremental changes against a comparison group. Start with zero impact until evidence justifies an assumption.
pp = percentage points. Per-person values are placeholders, not official unit costs. The adjustment scales benefits retained after any justified attribution or realisation haircut; it is not a statistical confidence interval.
ILLUSTRATIVE ONE-YEAR RESULT£0
Adjusted gross fiscal value
- Expected additional employment outcomes
- 0
- Expected avoided reoffenders
- 0
- Net fiscal value
- −£150,000
- Net return on programme cost
- −100%
- Gross fiscal value per £1 invested
- £0.00
- Benefit needed to break even
- £150,000
Scenario output. Not a forecast, validated NCE result or investor return.
METHOD AND LIMITS
Show the workings.
Expose the uncertainty.
How the scenario is calculated
Employment value = participants × employment uplift ÷ 100 × annual fiscal value per job × sustained months ÷ 12. Justice value = participants × reoffending reduction ÷ 100 × non-overlapping fiscal value per avoided reoffender. Adjusted gross value = (employment value + justice value) × adjustment ÷ 100.
Net value = adjusted gross value − full programme cost. Net ROI = net value ÷ programme cost. Gross return = adjusted gross value ÷ programme cost. Expected outcome counts can be fractional because these are cohort-level scenarios.
Prevent double counting
The same person may achieve both outcomes. Only add the two benefit lines when their cost components do not overlap. Exclude victim harm and lost earnings from the fiscal reoffending unit; do not add wages to tax and benefit changes. A university economist should define the cost ledger and counterfactual.
What a full HPR-J appraisal needs
A defined comparator; timing of outcomes; deadweight, displacement and attribution; validated unit costs and sources; discounting over multiple years; uncertainty analysis; full development and delivery costs; and identification of the body receiving each benefit. Separate cash savings from reduced service demand.
Why the employment route matters
An employer introduction or conditional offer could make the pathway more tangible, but its effect on motivation and reoffending remains a research question. Measure actual starts, job quality and retention, alongside housing, health and other support needs.
AN INVITATION TO UNIVERSITIES
Help turn a promising idea
into credible evidence.
We are seeking a university research lead, an operational justice partner and employers willing to help design the first test.