|Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant|
|Taxpayers||$250||Benefits minus costs||$810|
|Participants||$515||Benefit to cost ratio||$7.79|
|Others||$217||Chance the program will produce|
|Indirect||($53)||benefits greater than the costs||56 %|
|Net program cost||($119)|
|Benefits minus cost||$810|
|Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant|
|Benefits from changes to:1||Benefits to:|
|Labor market earnings associated with test scores||$236||$519||$233||$0||$987|
|Health care associated with educational attainment||$14||($4)||($16)||$7||$2|
|Adjustment for deadweight cost of program||$0||$0||$0||($60)||($60)|
|Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant|
|Annual cost||Year dollars||Summary|
|Program costs||$114||2013||Present value of net program costs (in 2017 dollars)||($119)|
|Comparison costs||$0||2013||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||Treatment age||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|
Guryan, J., Kim, J.S., & Quinn, D.M. (2014). Does reading during the summer build reading skills? Evidence from a randomized experiment in 463 classrooms (NBER Working Paper 20689). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Kim, J.S. (2006). Effects of a voluntary summer reading intervention on reading achievement: Results from a randomized field trial. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 28(4), 335-355.
Kim, J.S., & Guryan, J. (2010). The efficacy of a voluntary summer book reading intervention for low-income Latino children from language minority families. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(1), 20-31.
Kim, J.S., & White, T.G. (2008). Scaffolding voluntary summer reading for children in grades 3 to 5: An experimental study. Scientific Studies of Reading, 12(1), 1-23.
Pagan, S. (2010). Children reading for pleasure: Investigating predictors of reading achievement and the efficacy of a paired-reading intervention to foster children's literacy skills. (Doctoral dissertation, Carleton University, 2010, UMI No. NR70556).