Cost-Benefit Study of School Nursing Services | Nursing | JAMA Pediatrics | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
Perrin  JM, Bloom  SR, Gortmaker  SL.  The increase of childhood chronic conditions in the United States.  JAMA. 2007;297(24):2755-2759.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Branum  AM, Lukacs  SL.  Food allergy among children in the United States.  Pediatrics. 2009;124(6):1549-1555.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Akinbami  LJ, Moorman  JE, Garbe  PL, Sondik  EJ.  Status of childhood asthma in the United States, 1980-2007.  Pediatrics. 2009;123(suppl 3):S131-S145.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  National diabetes fact sheet: national estimates and general information on diabetes and prediabetes in the US, 2011. Accessed March 27, 2014.
Robison  LM, Sclar  DA, Skaer  TL, Galin  RS.  National trends in the prevalence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and the prescribing of methylphenidate among school-age children: 1990-1995.  Clin Pediatr (Phila). 1999;38(4):209-217.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Unlocking the Potential of School Nursing: Keeping Children Healthy. In:  School, and Ready to Learn. Washington, DC: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation; 2010.
National Association of School Nurses.  School nurses provide back-to-school checklist for parents. Accessed March 27, 2014.
Burkhardt Research Services.  School Nursing in the United States: A Quantitative Study. Silver Spring, MD: National Association of School Nurses; 2007.
Delack  S.  Vision, voice, and visibility: charting the course.  NASN Sch Nurse. 2009;24(5):176-177.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Vollinger  LJ, Bergren  MD, Belmonte-Mann  F.  Substitutes for school nurses in Illinois.  J Sch Nurs. 2011;27(2):111-119.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Noyes  K, Bajorska  A, Fisher  S, Sauer  J, Fagnano  M, Halterman  JS.  Cost-effectiveness of the School-Based Asthma Therapy (SBAT) program.  Pediatrics. 2013;131(3):e709-e717.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Weismuller  PC, Grasska  MA, Alexander  M, White  CG, Kramer  P.  Elementary school nurse interventions: attendance and health outcomes.  J Sch Nurs. 2007;23(2):111-118.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Telljohann  SK, Dake  JA, Price  JH.  Effect of full-time versus part-time school nurses on attendance of elementary students with asthma.  J Sch Nurs. 2004;20(6):331-334.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Pennington  N, Delaney  E.  The number of students sent home by school nurses compared to unlicensed personnel.  J Sch Nurs. 2008;24(5):290-297.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Wyman  LL.  Comparing the number of ill or injured students who are released early from school by school nursing and nonnursing personnel.  J Sch Nurs. 2005;21(6):350-355.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Allen  G.  The impact of elementary school nurses on student attendance.  J Sch Nurs. 2003;19(4):225-231.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Hill  NJ, Hollis  M.  Teacher time spent on student health issues and school nurse presence.  J Sch Nurs. 2012;28(3):181-186.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Baisch  MJ, Lundeen  SP, Murphy  MK.  Evidence-based research on the value of school nurses in an urban school system.  J Sch Health. 2011;81(2):74-80.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Haddix  AC, Teutsch  SM, Corso  PS.  Prevention Effectiveness: A Guide to Decision Analysis and Economic Evaluation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2003.
Massachusetts Department of Public Health.  The Essential School Health Services Program Data Report, 2009-2010 School Year.2011. Accessed March 27, 2014.
Massachusetts Department of Public Health.  Suggested best practice guidelines to complete the monthly MA DPH report via HealthOffice V5.5 SP1.2009. Accessed March 27, 2014.
Young  GJ, Chou  CH, Alexander  J, Lee  SY, Raver  E.  Provision of community benefits by tax-exempt U.S. hospitals.  N Engl J Med. 2013;368(16):1519-1527.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Original Investigation
July 2014

Cost-Benefit Study of School Nursing Services

Author Affiliations
  • 1Division of Adolescent and School Health, National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
  • 2Office of School Health Services, Division of Primary Care and Health Access, Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Boston
  • 3Waltham Public Schools, Newton, Massachusetts
  • 4National Association of School Nurses, Silver Spring, Maryland
JAMA Pediatr. 2014;168(7):642-648. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.5441

Importance  In recent years, across the United States, many school districts have cut on-site delivery of health services by eliminating or reducing services provided by qualified school nurses. Providing cost-benefit information will help policy makers and decision makers better understand the value of school nursing services.

Objective  To conduct a case study of the Massachusetts Essential School Health Services (ESHS) program to demonstrate the cost-benefit of school health services delivered by full-time registered nurses.

Design, Setting, and Participants  Standard cost-benefit analysis methods were used to estimate the costs and benefits of the ESHS program compared with a scenario involving no school nursing service. Data from the ESHS program report and other published studies were used. A total of 477 163 students in 933 Massachusetts ESHS schools in 78 school districts received school health services during the 2009-2010 school year.

Interventions  School health services provided by full-time registered nurses.

Main Outcomes and Measures  Costs of nurse staffing and medical supplies incurred by 78 ESHS districts during the 2009-2010 school year were measured as program costs. Program benefits were measured as savings in medical procedure costs, teachers’ productivity loss costs associated with addressing student health issues, and parents’ productivity loss costs associated with student early dismissal and medication administration. Net benefits and benefit-cost ratio were calculated. All costs and benefits were in 2009 US dollars.

Results  During the 2009-2010 school year, at a cost of $79.0 million, the ESHS program prevented an estimated $20.0 million in medical care costs, $28.1 million in parents’ productivity loss, and $129.1 million in teachers’ productivity loss. As a result, the program generated a net benefit of $98.2 million to society. For every dollar invested in the program, society would gain $2.20. Eighty-nine percent of simulation trials resulted in a net benefit.

Conclusions and Relevance  The results of this study demonstrated that school nursing services provided in the Massachusetts ESHS schools were a cost-beneficial investment of public money, warranting careful consideration by policy makers and decision makers when resource allocation decisions are made about school nursing positions.