Risk and value in privately financed health care projects

De Marco, A and Mangano, G (2013) Risk and value in privately financed health care projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 139(8), pp. 918-926. ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

An empirical study is presented to investigate the risk factors affecting the value for money that can be obtained from using the public-private partnership delivery system to develop social facility projects. Based on a model describing the main risks affecting a project, a linear regression analysis is conducted on a data set of privately financed health care projects in the United Kingdom to explore the main factors that might have significant relationships with the annual unitary charge payment. The results reveal that the economic and political environment, the hospital capacity, the construction duration, and the concession period are significant factors of the price paid by the granting authority. The study confirms that the unitary charge is not only affected by investment, operations, and financial life-cycle costs, but also by risk factors and the level of risk allocated to the private sponsors. The proposed methodology might help both public and private parties in improving a private finance initiative project's compensation design, in order to achieve a higher value in privately financed infrastructures. The given model might also support the process of better determining the amount of annual payment based on select drivers and appropriately transferred risk factors.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: build/operate/transfer; financial factors; health care facilities; project management; regression analysis; risk management
Index terms: concession period, partnership, empirical study, health care, risk factor, risk management, financial factor, duration, compensation, project management, regression analysis, United Kingdom, methodology, private finance initiative, health care facility, value-for-money
Subjects: construction type, risk assessment, dispute resolution, contractual arrangements, economic analysis, contract structure, research methods, public and environmental health, Geography, project management theory and practice, evaluation, project controls, partnership management, statistical analysis, environmental hazards
Topics: Risk Management, Stakeholder Management, Construction Technology, Procurement, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Project Management, Time Control, Legal Issues, Value Management
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTA

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here