|Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant|
|Taxpayers||$32||Benefits minus costs||($51)|
|Participants||$38||Benefit to cost ratio||$0.57|
|Others||$35||Chance the program will produce|
|Indirect||($36)||benefits greater than the costs||30 %|
|Net program cost||($121)|
|Benefits minus cost||($51)|
|Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant|
|Benefits from changes to:1||Benefits to:|
|Labor market earnings associated with high school graduation||$17||$37||$17||$17||$88|
|K-12 special education||$4||$0||$0||$2||$6|
|Health care associated with disruptive behavior disorder||$10||$3||$12||$5||$30|
|Costs of higher education||($2)||($3)||($1)||($1)||($6)|
|Adjustment for deadweight cost of program||$0||$0||$0||($60)||($60)|
|Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant|
|Annual cost||Year dollars||Summary|
|Program costs||$117||2013||Present value of net program costs (in 2016 dollars)||($121)|
|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|
|Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms||6||1||3637||-0.108||0.024||6||0.000||0.005||7||-0.108||0.001|
|Externalizing behavior symptoms||6||3||4214||-0.060||0.041||7||-0.028||0.024||10||-0.060||0.172|
Grossman, D.C., Neckerman, H.J., Koepsell, T.D., Liu, P.Y., Asher, K.N., Beland, K., . . . Rivara, F.P. (1997). Effectiveness of a violence prevention curriculum among children in elementary school: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 277(20), 1605-1611.
Low, S., Cook, C.R., Smolkowski, K., & Buntain-Ricklefs, J. (2015). Promoting social-emotional competence: An evaluation of the elementary version of Second Step®. Journal of School Psychology, 53(6), 463-477.
Neace, W.P., & Muñoz, M.A. (2012). Pushing the boundaries of education: Evaluating the impact of Second Step®: A violence prevention curriculum with psychosocial and non-cognitive measures. Child & Youth Services, 33(1), 46-69.
Sullivan, T.N., Sutherland, K.S., Farrell, A.D., & Taylor, K.A. (2015). An evaluation of Second Step: What are the benefits for youth with and without disabilities?. Remedial and special education, 36(5), 286-298.