skip to main content
Washington State Institute for Public Policy
Back Button

Behavioral Monitoring and Reinforcement Program (BMRP)

Public Health & Prevention: School-based
  Literature review updated April 2012.
Open PDF
Behavioral Monitoring and Reinforcement Program (BMRP) is a school-based intervention that aims to prevent juvenile delinquency, substance use, and school failure for high-risk adolescents. For two years, beginning in 7th grade, participants' school records are monitored for attendance, tardiness, and disciplinary action. Program staff contact parents by letter, phone, and occasional home visits to inform them of their child's progress. Teachers submit weekly reports assessing students' punctuality, preparedness, and behavior in the classroom. The students are rewarded for good evaluations. Each week, three-to-five students meet with a staff member to discuss their recent behaviors and their consequences and role-play prosocial alternatives to problem behaviors.
META-ANALYSIS
CITATIONS

Meta-analysis is a statistical method to combine the results from separate studies on a program, policy, or topic in order to estimate its effect on an outcome. WSIPP systematically evaluates all credible evaluations we can locate on each topic. The outcomes measured are the types of program impacts that were measured in the research literature (for example, crime or educational attainment). Treatment N represents the total number of individuals or units in the treatment group across the included studies.

An effect size (ES) is a standard metric that summarizes the degree to which a program or policy affects a measured outcome. If the effect size is positive, the outcome increases. If the effect size is negative, the outcome decreases.

Adjusted effect sizes are used to calculate the benefits from our benefit cost model. WSIPP may adjust effect sizes based on methodological characteristics of the study. For example, we may adjust effect sizes when a study has a weak research design or when the program developer is involved in the research. The magnitude of these adjustments varies depending on the topic area.

WSIPP may also adjust the second ES measurement. Research shows the magnitude of some effect sizes decrease over time. For those effect sizes, we estimate outcome-based adjustments which we apply between the first time ES is estimated and the second time ES is estimated. We also report the unadjusted effect size to show the effect sizes before any adjustments have been made. More details about these adjustments can be found in our Technical Documentation.

Meta-Analysis of Program Effects
Outcomes measured No. of effect sizes Treatment N Adjusted effect size(ES) and standard error(SE) Unadjusted effect size (random effects model)
ES SE Age ES p-value
Crime 12 1 30 -0.213 0.501 16 -0.561 0.271
Employment 12 1 30 0.269 0.519 16 0.709 0.215
Grade point average 12 3 34 0.299 0.244 16 0.786 0.002
School attendance 12 3 34 0.343 0.244 16 0.903 0.001

Citations Used in the Meta-Analysis

Bry, B.H., & George, F.E. (1979). Evaluating and improving prevention programs: A strategy from drug abuse. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2(2), 127-136.

Bry, B.H., & George, F.E. (1980). The preventive effects of early intervention on the attendance and grades of urban adolescents. Professional Psychology, 11(2), 252-260.

Bry, B.H. (1982). Reducing the incidence of adolescent problems through preventive intervention: One- and five-year follow-up. American Journal of Community Psychology, 10(3), 265-276.