Ideas For Dealing With The Problem Of Traffic Congestion In New York City

Overview of the Problem

I was, first, exposed to the problem of traffic congestion in New York City by an astute MIT trained Economics Professor at Queens College (C.U.N.Y) - Dr. Michael Dohan. In his Price Theory & Distribution class (during my first Master's Program), he suggested many economical ideas to address the problem. As a matter of fact, he approached me to write a thesis on the N.Y.C. traffic congestion problem for my Master's program (concentration in Economics). (For the sake of disclosure, I chose another 'non-traditional' topic for my thesis.)

Later, I started an extensive research on the problem of traffic congestion in New York City (N.Y.C. traffic problem). N.Y.C. traffic problem's socioeconomic costs are exponentially growing each year. The socioeconomic costs will be expensive for everyone if we do not expeditiously and gingerly address New York City transportation challenges pointed out by the following quote - In New York City, the biggest infrastructure challenge is our transportation system. Our mass-transit system carries a third of America's commuters every day via commuter rail, subways and buses. We have 7 million trips a day and we are at capacity. There has not been an expansion of our system since the 1940s. Similarly, the streets and highways that service New York City have not grown and there is little possibility of expanding them (Wylde, 2007, para 2).

Causes of the Problem

Limited Resources

Presently, New York City has 'many irons in the fire.' In other words, it is subsidizing (at least requested by Forest City Ratner) the Atlantic Yard Projects to the tune of $200 million (Naparstek, 2005). According to the distinguished Harvard trained Queens College professor and World Trade Center consultant Dr. Martin D. Hanlon, the new World Trade Center will costs N.Y.C. over 10 billion dollars. Similarly, according to Wylde (2007), construction of the well advertised (by the local media) new subway line on 2nd Avenue in Manhattan is estimated to equal the cost of the construction of the new World Trade Center. These huge capital projects will take years to complete. If we learn anything from the Iraqi War/Project/Fiasco - the costs will be greater than the original calculations/estimates.

Short Term Thinking

During the flight from the urban centers to suburbia after World War II to the 1970s, New York City transportation system remained stagnant and/or reversed. Public policy implementation was geared toward suburbia's and Upstate New York's transportation systems. In the mid 80s to the present time, N.Y.C. population rebounded to the amount of over 8 million residents. N.Y.C remains the de facto capital of the world where millions of people visit the city via the regional airports. For example, La Guardia Airport (L.G.A.) annually processed 25 million passengers while John F. Kennedy Airport (J.F.K.) annually processed over 40 million passengers. Millions more commuters commuted to work in the financial hub of the world from the Tri-State areas and Pennsylvania. Despite the present circumstance of the influx of people, goods and services into N.Y.C as demonstrated in the preceding paragraph, N.Y.C is very slow to make visionary/long term improvements in its transportation system and infrastructure. For example, yellow cabs traffic can be greatly reduced if a train system similar to the MARTA's train system in Atlanta, Georgia links Manhattan to L.G.A.

Effect of the Problem

Economic Costs

Again, the socioeconomic costs will be expensive for everyone involved as pointed out by the following quote - "So today, as a result of the limitations of our transit system and our highways and roads, traffic congestion is among the biggest threats to our city's competitiveness and its ability to attract business and talent into New York. We are unsure where the tipping point is, but there will come a time when it is simply too inconvenient, too unreliable and too expensive to conduct business in our central business districts because the difficulty of moving goods and people" (Wylde, 2007, para 5).

Proposed Solutions

Recommended Solution

In my opinion, congestion pricing is the answer to the N.Y.C. traffic congestion problem as proposed by Professor Michael Dohan. According to the professor, congestion pricing is the pricing for the use of roads during certain peak time of the day. Going by Dr. Dohan's analysis, congestion pricing would be the most effective tool against traffic congestion. For example, London (a city similar to N.Y.C.), England and Stockholm, Sweden are very successful in their respective implementation of congestion pricing (Wylde, 2007).

Alternate Solutions

Naparstek (2005) recommended other solutions such as: improve subway service and facilities; create incentives to take transit; limit and manage parking space; design a great pedestrian environment; get bus rapid transit rolling (B.R.T.), and make N.Y.C. more bike-friendly. For example, N.Y.C. parking spaces are very cheap and abundant in comparison to parking spaces in London, England. Naparstek (2005) recommended N.Y.C. to make prices more expensive and reduce parking spaces. In turn, commuters will be more inclined to take cheaper public transportation rather than paying high parking fees. These solutions are answers to the N.Y.C. traffic problem. In other words, congestion pricing is only one piece of the N.Y.C. traffic puzzle.

Opposition to Recommended Solution

According to Schaller (2006), congestion pricing opponents decried it as punitive and additional taxation. Other opponents claimed that the congestion pricing experiment in London is unsuccessful because 62 percent of businesses in London reported a drop in customers since its implementation (Schaller, 2006). To the first claim, the present cost suffered due to the 'taxing' (pun intended) traffic congestion is more costly than congestion pricing. For example, the adage - "foregoing a college education is more expensive than obtaining a college education." To the second claim, London was suffering a severe recession at the time of the implementation of congestion pricing as per Schaller (2006).

Next Steps

In conclusion, congestion pricing is a solution your administration should seriously consider to implement. Other viable solutions were proposed in the above paragraphs. The alternate solutions should be considered. Howbeit, the priority should be placed on congestion pricing due to the limited resources of N.Y.C. Opponents of congestion pricing will continue to attack it from their 'anti-tax' platform. For the long term, you have to do what's necessary for the benefit of the socioeconomic vitality of our city.

Rent Control in New York City

Throughout this essay, I will expound on the background of Rent Control in New York City; the debate/controversy over it in New York City, including historical and present opposition to as well as historical and present support for it. In addition, I will discuss opposition and support for it in other U.S. cities; my opinion of the opposition as well as support for Rent Control.

What is Rent Control? It is a program administered by the New York City Office of Rent Administration, which is responsible for regulating rents in about 1.2 million privately owned rental units statewide under four laws: the Emergency Housing Rent Control Law, the Local Emergency Tenant Control Act, the Rent Stabilization Law, and the Emergency Tenants Protection Act (ETPA). The preceding four laws are the foundation of the rent regulation systems commonly known as "Rent Control" and rent stabilization (New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, 2006). However, the focus of this essay will be centered on New York City because of the limited scope of this paper.

Rent Control usually applies to residential buildings constructed before February 1947 in 55 municipalities (including New York City, Albany, Buffalo and various cities, towns, and villages in Albany, Erie, Nassau, Rensselaer, Schenectady and Westchester counties), that have not declared an end to the postwar rental housing emergency (New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, 2006). The rules are as follows: for an apartment to be rent controlled, the tenant (or his/her parents) must have been living in that apartment continuously since before July 1, 1971. If a rent controlled apartment should become vacant, it will either become rent stabilized, or, if it is in a building with fewer than six units, it is generally removed from regulation. In addition, an apartment in a one- or two-family house without commercial units must have a tenant in continuous occupancy since March 31, 1953 in order for it to be legally rent controlled. Once it is vacated after March 31, 1953, it is no longer subject to regulation. Previously controlled apartments are usually decontrolled on various other grounds (New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, 2006).

Rent Control restricts the right of an owner to evict tenants and limits the rent an owner may charge for an apartment. It also requires the owner to provide essential services and equipment. For example, the owner must provide and maintain all services furnished or required to be furnished on the base date of May 1, 1950 for rent controlled apartments outside of NYC, and March 1, 1943 for those within NYC. Moreover, modifications required and essential services may have been ordered thereafter, with an appropriate adjustment in rent. The essential services may include, but are not limited to: repairs; maintenance; the furnishing of light; heat; hot and cold water; elevator service; kitchen ; bath and laundry facilities and privileges; janitor service, and removal of refuse (New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, 2006).

The New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR), outside NYC, determines maximum allowable rates of rent increases under the aforementioned regulation. Periodically, owners may apply for these increases. On the other hand, the said regulation operates under the Maximum Base Rent (MBR) system in NYC. MBR allows a maximum base rent to be established for each apartment which is adjusted every two years to reflect changes in operating costs. Furthermore, owners who certify that they are providing essential services and have removed violations may raise rents by up to 7.5% each year until the MBR limit is reached (New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, 2006). In turn, tenants may challenge the increase on the grounds that the building has violations or the owner's expenses do not warrant an increase. They may do so by filing Challenge Re: Maximum Base Rent Order (DHCR Form RA-94 MBR). Owners may challenge Maximum Base Rent Orders by filing DHCR Form RA-94 MBR, also (New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, 2006).

"Rents may be increased in other ways: (1) if the owner increases services or substantially rehabilitates a building or installs a major capital improvement; (2) hardship; (3) increased labor costs; (4) in NYC, increased fuel costs (passalongs)" (New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, 2006). In turn, DHCR may decrease rents in certain cases: substantial, uncorrected code violations and reductions in services including facilities, space or equipment, or ancillary services (New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, 2006).

The preceding paragraphs depict the background and the law of rent controlled housing which contribute to the debate/controversy of it. The main argument of the opposition to the regulation is that it prevents developers from building new housing as illustrated in the following quote,

"It is hard to find any economist who supports rent restraints. Price controls, even if laboriously tweaked, inevitably produce inefficiencies, reduce supply and cause bad side-effects. Black markets and bribery thrive. Building maintenance is often ignored. Landlords and tenants find themselves in poisonous relationships, since they are linked by law rather than by voluntarily renewable contracts. Unscrupulous property owners go to dangerous lengths to evict tenants in order to get higher-paying replacements; as a result, tenant-protection laws have been enacted that make it almost impossible to evict even a scoundrel" (Economist.com, 2003, para 10).

In turn, the main argument of the support for the law is that it creates stability as illustrated by the following quote,

"Now, in principle I think rent control is great-- people shouldn't be driven out of their homes because the neighborhood gets richer and they don't. Landlords getting the profits from increased real estate values is a bit of a scam to begin with since they are benefitting [sic] from social progress in a neighborhood, not their own efforts" (Newman, 2003, para 1).

If we describe supporters of price control on the renting of residential housing as good and opponents of it as bad.... Do we call greedy, opportunistic and hypocritical flip floppers ("do as I say but don't do as I do" on Rent Control) - ugly? So is the case of Robert Nozick, author of the 1974 National Book Award winner: "Anarchy, State and Utopia" which solidified the Harvard philosophy professor's reputation as the intellectual hero of libertarians. Dr. Nozick preaches the supremacy of free markets being the key to a successful society and capitalism should be given a free hand to operate without external interference such as the economic interventionism of contemporary liberals (Tucker, 2003). However, like his conservative cousins (T.V. evangelists) - Jim Baker and Jimmy Swaggart: preachers of the ugliness of sin - Dr. Nozick doesn't always practice what he preaches.... Then, again, he is a living testament to the adage: "there's no atheist in a foxhole because everyone prays to God when their life (self-interest) is on the line."

Case in point: Professor Nozick - an eminent anti-price control advocate successfully used price control laws on the renting of residential housing in Cambridge, Massachusetts against his landlord, the renowned classical scholar and author of "Love Story" - Eric Segal. Eric Segal was forced to settle the lawsuit, in order, to get Professor Nozick to move out of his condominium apartment (Tucker, 2003).

The above paragraphs illustrate the make-up of the debate/controversy of rent-control. Let's continue with the opposition to such control in New York City by starting with its historical roots. According to Economist.com (2003,) - an anti-price control advocate, the law on the renting of residential housing was one of many price controls brought in during the grim, panicky period between the attack on Pearl Harbour in 1941 and America's move to a full wartime economy in 1943. Like rubber, petroleum, coffee and shoes, housing was looked upon as a vital commodity that needed to be regulated for 'the good of the citizens' during a time of war. The Economist.com article (2003) mentioned above continued to lament that by 1947 all the price controls were phased out, except property-price regulations. Specifically, the website pointed out that most cities eventually scrapped the preceding market distortions except the capital of capitalism - New York City (Economist.com, 2003).

From its inception to its current form, the rent ordinance is vitriolically resisted by its opponents - mainly landlords and free market economists. For example, Swedish Economist Assar Lindbeck compared the effects of the ordinance on a city to a city destroyed by bombing. Walter Block, holder of the Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Chair in Economics at Loyola University's Joseph A. Butt, S. J. College of Business Administration, offered an anecdote on his website, illustrating that it is worse than bombing (Block, 2002). (Seriously, I wondered if Dr. Block considers it to be more destructive on an urban center than the Nagasaki and Hiroshima's nuclear bombing or Washington, D.C. and New York City's 9/11 attacks)?

The main complaints against ceiling on rents in New York City seem to be centered on the following.... First, it is a government-mandated price control which is a law that places a maximum price (rent ceiling) on what landlords may charge tenants. In turn, rent ceiling causes shortages, diminution in the quality of the product, and queues, as in the case of other price ceilings (Block, 2002).

Second, it diverts new investment, which would otherwise have gone to rental housing, toward other profitable ventures. Thus, the diversion leads to housing deterioration, to fewer repairs and less maintenance. For example, price ceiling has destroyed entire sections of sound housing in New York's South Bronx whereas it has led to decay and abandonment throughout the entire five boroughs of the city (Block, 2002).

Third, it often benefits the wealthy and politically connected long term tenants instead of tenants who need it most - lower middle class and working class tenants. For example, multimillionaire Ed Koch currently resides in a rent-controlled apartment which he maintained while living in City Hall as the Mayor of New York City.

Let's take a look at the support for rent law in New York City by starting with its historical roots. The rent ceiling program in New York City, like most major cities in Western Europe and North America during World War I, was introduced to mitigate disruptive effects of the War and to prevent profiteering. Subsequently, in some cities, the programs were discontinued after the War while they lingered on in other cities. In World War II, rent freezes were imposed throughout the major cities of Western Europe and North America. Again, all North American cities were fully decontrolled by about 1950 with the exception of New York City (Arnott, 1997).

From its inception to its current form, the housing law is steadfastly supported by its supporters - mainly tenants, and liberal and socialist leaning organizations and politicians. For example, Rachel Treichler (an avid supporter) - the Green Party candidate for New York Attorney General in 2006 made it in New York City and affordable housing in general as one of her major planks in her campaign platform (Voterachel.org). Another example is Betsy Gotbaum - Public Advocate for the City of New York who vociferously campaigned against rent deregulation prior to the expiration of New York City said housing laws in 2003 (Pubadvocate.nyc.gov, 2003).

The main praises for laws or ordinances that set price controls on the renting of residential housing in New York City seem to be centered on the following.... First, it allows working class families and retirees to live in good neighborhoods in N.Y.C. For example, a minimum wage earner would have to work 154 hours a week to afford a two-bedroom apartment at market rent. Second, New York City depends on the diverse work force for her economy; without Rent Control, working class families would have to relocate to other affordable cities. Third, it minimizes tough decisions by working class and retired tenants, such as choosing between rent and food or medication (Pubadvocate.nyc.gov, 2003).

In other cities, opponents and supporters of laws or ordinances that set price controls on the renting of residential housing voiced similar arguments. In Hoboken, New Jersey, its advocates are able to successfully maintain the status quo despite their community undergoing a major gentrification. In Santa Monica, California, its advocates were able to introduce rent control to the community while simultaneously electing pro-rent control City council members in 1979. In Baltimore, Maryland, its advocates developed a citywide housing organization after a pro-rent control law was struck down as unconstitutional by state courts. In San Francisco, California, its advocates eventually won a rent control law despite many hurdles engineered by opponents (Policylink.org, 2006). In Cambridge, Massachusetts, its opponent Jerry Calen of Narsil.org (2003) reported that the effort to re-impose rent control in Cambridge was defeated by slightly more than a 3 to 2 margin.

I personally unabashedly support laws or ordinances that set price controls on the renting of residential housing in New York City for all the reasons and arguments by its advocates reported depicted in this essay, despite being a homeowner. My opinion of the positions taken by its opponents is similar to my opinion of the positions taken by opponents of the Minimum Wage. For example, opponents like Dr. Nozick base their opinions in their own self-interest instead of the interest of the common good.

Another personal example of the housing ordinance is illustrated in the case of my former professor and an assistant department chair (Ph.D., University of Wisconsin-Madison) who co-authored a textbook with another of my former professors (Ph.D., Massachusetts Institute of Technology). The textbook, like most economics textbooks, is highly critical of rent ceiling because of its relationship to the odiousness of price controls. Nonetheless, the professor maintains a rent-controlled apartment in Manhattan along with his privately owned house in Upstate New York. Is my professor's case similar to Dr. Nozick's case? I think not ...although my answer is very biased. From my personal experience, my professor's ethics are impeccable and he is of an irreproachable character. He is one of my best former professors (along with the other mentioned professor). Continuing my disclosure, I earned an A in one of his honor classes because of his superb teaching skills. He, also, selected me to be on a college academic team that earned third place in a nationwide economics competition. OK, so what is my point? My point is rent ceiling like Minimum Wage has a gray area that is situated between the extremes of 'black' (opponents) and 'white' (supporters) - a gray area best illustrated by the following quote:

"Rent control has been presented to fifty years of economics students as an object lesson in bad policy. Over that period, however, the nature of rent control has changed from a rent freeze to rent regulation which allows each jurisdiction to choose its policy from an extensive menu of provisions. At the same time, economic theory has become more sophisticated and sensible while the standards for the empirical testing of theory have increased enormously. As a result, expert opinion on the effects of modern rent control policies has become increasingly agnostic" (Arnott, 1997).

The preceding quote represents the best way to end this essay as it pertains to the background and history of the debate of Rent Control.

Criteria for Selecting Offshore Web Development Company for Developing Responsive Web Application

There are several web development companies that offer lucrative prices when a prospective client visits their website. Many times the prices listed on the websites do not include hidden costs that most web development companies charge from the clients, once they hire them. From the clients' perspective, charges do not matter much as once they decide to outsource the web development project to an offshore company, they mentally prepare their minds to pay for the services that they would avail. However it might be quite disappointing for them to pay additional hidden costs which were not disclosed at the time of finalizing the deal. In such situations, most clients try to compromise with the service providers once and for the last time. At one part, the dissatisfaction of the client might affect the business of the organizations, while on other part clients lose their trusts in the web development companies, hence looking for various freelancing sites to hire individual web developers to work for them on freelancing basis.

To avoid above discussed embarrassing and unpleasing situations, clients must do some research work on their own before they finally outsource their project to any web development company to develop a responsive web application. Some points that clients must always consider while selecting the best offshore web development organizations are:

• Previous Work - Before outsourcing responsive web development project to any organization, clients must always go through the previously developed and hosted sites by the company. This would give the clients an idea of the quality and efficiency of site that the organization may develop. Many legitimate organizations provide links to their previous works on their official websites so that it becomes easier for the visitors to locate and assess the quality of service that the organizations deliver.

• Consumers' Reviews - Consumers' reviews are one of the major aspects while selecting the best web development organization. Since the consumers are the end users of the service providers, their judgments and assessment statements can be counted on. It is always a good practice to interact with the consumers via e-mails or any other communication medium in order to get the detailed information about the organizations and the quality of service that they provide.

• Website Uptime and Loading - When website is developed and is uploaded to be hosted on a web server to be made available publicly and accessed by everyone, the time it takes while getting downloaded on the clients computers reflects the quality and the size of the webpage that is developed by the organization. Moreover, the duration for which the site may become unavailable in case of any network failure or congestion reflects the efficiency of the web server and the hosting service provider. The longer the website takes to become available after the failure, the lesser efficient it is considered to be.

• Quality of After Sales Service - After sales service is one of the most important aspects while selecting an offshore web development organization. Since the website is delivered just once after its development, and it is only the after sales service that represents the promptness of the organization and the efficiency in their work, clients must choose the web development organizations wisely.

• Technically Skilled Staff - Since the website is to be developed and maintained by the outsourced organization, clients must always verify and crosscheck the technical abilities of the employees the organization has. The more technically skilled the staff of the organization is, the more efficient the developed website would be.

Business Buyout Agreements - Part II

This is the final article on business buyout agreements. In Part I we've covered the basic situations where it's prudent for business owners to create buyout agreements. We've discussed the major components of the buyout agreements, addressing the circumstances under which co-owners can compel each other to sell their interest in business, the right of first refusal and forced buyouts. The main question that still needs to be answered is how to calculate the appropriate price of business, and what will be the payment terms. We address this and other issues below.

Methods of valuation To prevent lengthy and foreseeable disputes over the appropriate value of the share, valuation method must be agreed upon.

Independent appraisal With this method, a third party neutral professional appraiser (preferably, a pre-selected one) determines the value of the company. The main advantage to this method is that it uses an objective and flexible standard which reflects the current value of the business, taking into account such difficult to value assets as company's goodwill, reputation and earnings potential. The main drawbacks are that it takes time and can get expensive.

Earnings capitalization With this method, you take company's gross revenue, subtract costs, and multiply this figure by a certain agreed-upon number (capitalization rate). The advantage of this method is that it is quick and relatively easy to calculate the value. The main drawback is that the final number may not represent the true value of the company. For example, the company may not show much profit, and yet have great real value, if you reinvested nearly all profit back into the healthy, growing company. To account for this, you may decide to multiply company's gross revenue, rather than pure profit.

Book value Book value is company's assets minus liabilities. The advantage of this method is its simplicity but the main drawback is that it does not account for earnings potential, especially if the company is new. To account for this drawback, you may decide to use a multiple of book value, where you multiply the book value by a certain agreed-upon number.

Other issues An effective buy-sell agreement should address the following issues:

- Should the agreement be guaranteed by pledging corporate assets, personal guarantees, loans, etc.?

- How to allocate shareholder loans?

- Should there be a covenant not to compete?

- Should the spouses of the shareholders sign the buy-sell agreement? What if they will not?

Performance Springs Are Widely Used For Competitions

What competitor would not want to show off their best abilities during a competition? Generally all individuals involved in any competitive sport which involves a trampoline prefer competition springs, so they provide the optimum level of performance. Equal performance opportunity, long-term durability, and increased bounce height are all reasons that professionals recommend competition springs.

Competitive activities and/or sports involving trampolines prefer competitive instead of recreational because they provide a fair performance opportunity. It is possible for recreational springs to over stretch during a competition because they are not designed to withstand the force that competition are produced to handle. Competition springs are produced with a thicker wire to resist force. They are also designed at longer lengths to combat over stretching. The performance provided by competition cannot be obtained with recreational springs.

Due to the design and material used to produce competition springs, they provide the highest possible bounce. The extensive length of the spring grants the jumper deeper penetration, which results in the jumper going higher in the air. Professionals recommend DR competition springs for jumpers who are most concerned with going higher in the air. These springs provide half the tension of a recreational trampoline spring, supporting deeper penetration.

Please note that competition springs are recommended for experienced jumpers only. Standard size for these types of springs is 10.25 inch.

Before you place the order for this, you need to make sure that you measured the length of the trampoline springs. The length includes the hook so when you are taking the measurement of the spring you need to make sure that you have included the full length including the hook. Replace over stretched or loose springs to make mat tense, in result to get the jump higher.

Trampoline springs can be separated into two main categories i.e. recreational and competition.

Recreational trampoline springs mainly used by families in their backyard and these springs comes in various sizes such as 10 inch, 9 inch, 8.25 inch, 8.5 inch, 8 inch, 7.5 inch, 7.25 inch, 7 inch, 6.5 inch, 6.25 inch, 5.5 inch, 4.375 inch, 4 inch and 3.3 inch.

Popular Performance Trampoline springs are Competition 10.25 inch GME and Competition 10.25 inch DR. These competitive types of springs usually made to be more bouncy especially for the Competition and events.

The main differences between recreation and competition are the quality of the material used, and the tension of the springs.

Healthcare Roadmap: Healthcare Strategy in a Post-Reform Environment

The concept of Wellness has been around for 25+ years, however most programs at the workplace fall short of full impact.

We will most likely agree that over the past five years, company profits have flattened, while healthcare costs have steadily risen.

Employers will need to find more innovative solutions to not only control costs, but instill employee accountability into their employee benefit plans.

According to the 2010 Towers Watson Employer Survey on Purchasing Value in Health Care Report, employer groups identified three concerns as the top challenges in maintaining affordable benefit coverage:

1. Employees' Poor Health habits, 2. Underuse of preventative services, and 3. High cost of catastrophic cases.

All three of the concerns listed above can be addresses and identified through properly designed wellness programs and certain incentive-based models, with a primary focus on outcome-based results.

Outcome-based results being the key word, it is important to first realize that a small number of claimants drive the largest percentage of claim dollars. Some of these "high claims" cannot be controlled, due to hereditary disease and/or uncontrollable injuries and illnesses, but a very large percentage of claim dollars can be controlled and often reversed.

Obesity and tobacco use are two of the major contributors to claim costs for just about any organization. These are also two of the more controllable drivers, and the proper implementation of robust wellness programs can begin to help control and contain costs in these areas.

The ultimate goal of a wellness program is to create and sustain a culture of heath within an organization. Once this culture has been realized, only then can healthcare costs begin to flatten or in many instances, actually begin to reverse.

With a large percentage of companies already having some form of a wellness program, the larger question becomes how to utilize and create systems that will actually accomplish the goal, and see a significant return on investment, which many wellness programs currently do not realize.

Before we discuss some of the parameters of successful programs, please note that according to The Harvard Business Review (Leonard L Berry, Ann M. Morabito, and William B. Baun, 2010), the ROI on comprehensive, well-run employee wellness programs can be as high as 6-1. If your business could purchase a product that generates a 6-1 ROI, you would most likely implement this product as quickly as possible.

For simplicity purposes, I will identify four levels to specifically designed to reduce trend.

Level One: Understanding, Supporting and Demonstrating the business value of workforce health. This is the beginning stage of building a healthy, productive workforce. By combining a set of employee incentives and activity-based results, strategies in this level are designed to implement a health insurance program that operates efficiently and lays the foundation for a High Performing Health Insurance program.

Level One Employee Responsibilities: 1. Mandatory biometric screenings and 2. Mandatory health risk assessments.

Level One Employer Responsibilities: 1. Formation of a Wellness Committee, 2. Achieve plan design adherence to high-performing results, 3. Demonstrate the organization's interest in employee well-being, and 4. Support employees' in managing their health and wealth.

Level Two: Establish business-focused goals to ensure that health investments deliver a health dividend - and begin to measure the program's success in producing targeted results. This is the second stage in building a healthy, productive workforce. By engaging employees' and promoting a culture of health, strategies in this level are designed to create a sense of shared responsibility and employee accountability for health and cost management.

Level Two Employee Responsibilities: 1. Health Promotion Programs, 2. Outcome-based results (first stage via rewards programs), 3. Voluntary preventative schedule, and 4. Use of information, resources and tools to support health promotion.

Level Two Employer Responsibilities: 1. Enhancement of Wellness Committee, 2. Changes in the work environment to encourage healthier behavior and support a culture of health, 3. Promote culture of shared responsibility and accountability, and 4. Create/Provide Health Resources Website.

Level Three: Designing programs that support transparency and create meaningful incentives for healthy behavior and choices. This is the first stage in outcome-based results. By establishing business-focused goals to ensure that health investments deliver a health dividend, strategies in this level are designed to rigorously measure the success of the program in producing targeted results.

Level Three Employee Responsibilities: 1. Care/Disease Management Programs, 2. Use of High-Performing providers, 3. Outcome-based results (second stage via rewards programs), 4. Use of Evidence-Based treatments, and 5. Health Advocacy/Coaching

Level Three Employer Responsibilities: 1. Further enhancement of the Wellness Committee, 2. Encouraging employees to assess their personal health risks, 3. Senior Management involvement/support, and 4. Disciplined execution.

Level Four: Designing programs that will drive the market towards better solutions that deliver more value for both employees and organizations. This is the second and final stage in outcome-based results. Strategies in this level are designed to align health benefit programs with rewards and business strategy, allowing businesses to create, achieve and maintain a competitive advantage.

Level Four Employee Responsibilities: 1. Mandatory Preventative Schedule, 2. Use of Centers of Excellence (E.g., Specialty Treatment Networks), and 3. Outcome based results (third stage via rewards program).

Level Four Employer Responsibilities: 1. Further enhancement of the Wellness Committee, 2. Further employee encouragement, 3. Further Senior Management involvement/support, and 4. Smoke free environment.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) will position wellness at the forefront. Legislation will force companies to evaluate their policies and procedures in healthcare by virtue of the Medical Loss Ratios (MLR's). Make sure that the MLR's have a positive impact within your organization.