META-ANALYSIS |
CITATIONS |
|
| Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant | ||||||
| Benefits to: | ||||||
| Taxpayers | $8,367 | Benefits minus costs | $20,946 | |||
| Participants | $2,598 | Benefit to cost ratio | $4.24 | |||
| Others | $16,146 | Chance the program will produce | ||||
| Indirect | $298 | benefits greater than the costs | 100 % | |||
| Total benefits | $27,408 | |||||
| Net program cost | ($6,462) | |||||
| Benefits minus cost | $20,946 | |||||
| Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant | |||||
| Benefits from changes to:1 | Benefits to: | ||||
| Taxpayers | Participants | Others2 | Indirect3 | Total |
|
| Crime | $6,882 | $0 | $15,216 | $3,425 | $25,523 |
| Labor market earnings associated with high school graduation | $1,317 | $2,900 | $1,336 | $0 | $5,552 |
| Health care associated with educational attainment | $312 | ($85) | ($341) | $155 | $40 |
| Costs of higher education | ($144) | ($216) | ($65) | ($71) | ($496) |
| Adjustment for deadweight cost of program | $0 | $0 | $0 | ($3,211) | ($3,211) |
| Totals | $8,367 | $2,598 | $16,146 | $298 | $27,408 |
| Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant | ||||
| Annual cost | Year dollars | Summary | ||
| Program costs | $6,389 | 2015 | Present value of net program costs (in 2016 dollars) | ($6,462) |
| Comparison costs | $0 | 2015 | 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 | ||||||||||
| ES | SE | Age | ES | SE | Age | ES | p-value | ||||
| Crime | 9 | 536 | -0.457 | 0.090 | 17 | -0.457 | 0.090 | 27 | -0.509 | 0.001 | |
Castellano, T.C., & Soderstrom, I.R. (1992). Therapeutic wilderness programs and juvenile recidivism: a program evaluation. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 17(3/4), 19-46.
Cytrynbaum, S., & Ken, K. (1975). The Connecticut Wilderness program: A Preliminary Evaluation Report. Hartford, CT: The Council on Human Services.
Elrod, P.H., & Minor, K. (1992). Second wave evaluation of a mulit-faceted intervention for juvenile court probationers. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 36(3), 247-262.
Gillis, H.L., & Gass, M.A. (2010). Treating juveniles in a sex offender program using adventure-based programming: a matched group design. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 19(1), 20-34.
Hileman, M.A. (1979). An evaluation of an environmental stress-challenge program on the social attitudes and recidvism behavior of male delinquent youth. Unpublished master's thesis, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.
Kelly, F.J. & Baer, D.J. (1971). Physical challenge as a treatment for delinquency. Crime and Delinquency, 17(4), 437-445.
Metametrics, Inc. (1984). Evaluation of the Breakthrough Foundation Youth at Risk Program: The 10-day Course and Follow-up Program.
Willman, H.C., & Chun, R.Y.F. (1973). Homeward bound: an alternative to the institutionalization of adjudicated juvenile offenders. Federal Probation, 37, 52-58.
Winterdyk, J., & Roesch, R. (1982). A wilderness experiential program as an alternative for probationers: An evaluation. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 24, 39-49.