|Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant|
|Taxpayers||$4,682||Benefits minus costs||$13,846|
|Participants||$0||Benefit to cost ratio||$9.66|
|Others||$9,235||Chance the program will produce|
|Indirect||$1,528||benefits greater than the costs||100 %|
|Net program cost||($1,599)|
|Benefits minus cost||$13,846|
|Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant|
|Benefits from changes to:1||Benefits to:|
|Adjustment for deadweight cost of program||$0||$0||$0||($790)||($790)|
|Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant|
|Annual cost||Year dollars||Summary|
|Program costs||$1,594||2014||Present value of net program costs (in 2015 dollars)||($1,599)|
|Comparison costs||$0||2014||Cost range (+ or -)||10 %|
|Estimated Cumulative Net Benefits Over Time (Non-Discounted Dollars)|
|The graph above illustrates the estimated cumulative net benefits per-participant for the first fifty years beyond the initial investment in the program. We present these cash flows in non-discounted dollars to simplify the “break-even” point from a budgeting perspective. If the dollars are negative (bars below $0 line), the cumulative benefits do not outweigh the cost of the program up to that point in time. The program breaks even when the dollars reach $0. At this point, the total benefits to participants, taxpayers, and others, are equal to the cost of the program. If the dollars are above $0, the benefits of the program exceed the initial investment.|
|Meta-Analysis of Program Effects|
|Outcomes measured||No. of effect sizes||Treatment N||Adjusted effect sizes (ES) and standard errors (SE) used in the benefit-cost analysis||Unadjusted effect size (random effects model)|
|First time ES is estimated||Second time ES is estimated|
Daley M., Love C.T., Shepard D.S., Petersen C.B., White K.L., & Hall F.B. (2004). Cost-effectiveness of Connecticut's in-prison substance abuse treatment. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 39(3), 69-92.
Drake, E.K. (2006). Washington's drug offender sentencing alternative: An update on recidivism findings (Document No. 06-12-1901). Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
Duwe, G. (2010). Prison-based chemical dependency treatment in Minnesota: An outcome evaluation. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 6(1), 57-81.
Peters, R.H., Kearns, W.D., Murrin, M.R., Dolente, A.S., & May, R.L. (1993). Examining the effectiveness of in-jail substance abuse treatment. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 19(3/4), 1-39.
Porter, R. (2002). Breaking the cycle: Technical report. New York: Vera Institute of Justice.