|Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant|
|Taxpayers||$10,008||Benefits minus costs||$13,824|
|Participants||$4,776||Benefit to cost ratio||$4.76|
|Others||$524||Chance the program will produce|
|Indirect||$2,190||benefits greater than the costs||97 %|
|Net program cost||($3,674)|
|Benefits minus cost||$13,824|
|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|
Child abuse and neglect
Substantiated or founded reports to child protective services.
The removal of a child from parental care, most often to foster care.
|Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant|
|Affected outcome:||Resulting benefits:1||Benefits accrue to:|
|Child abuse and neglect||Criminal justice system||$182||$0||$406||$91||$680|
|Child abuse and neglect||$253||$103||$0||$126||$482|
|K-12 grade repetition||$25||$0||$0||$12||$37|
|K-12 special education||$215||$0||$0||$107||$322|
|Property loss associated with alcohol abuse or dependence||$0||$0||$1||$0||$1|
|Health care associated with PTSD||$113||$32||$117||$57||$319|
|Labor market earnings associated with child abuse & neglect||$1,975||$4,640||$0||$0||$6,615|
|Mortality associated with child abuse and neglect||$1||$1||$0||$11||$13|
|Out-of-home placement||Out-of-home placement||$7,244||$0||$0||$3,622||$10,866|
|Program cost||Adjustment for deadweight cost of program||$0||$0||$0||($1,837)||($1,837)|
|Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant|
|Annual cost||Year dollars||Summary|
|Program costs||$3,547||2008||Present value of net program costs (in 2018 dollars)||($3,674)|
|Comparison costs||$392||2008||Cost range (+ or -)||10 %|
Benefits Minus Costs
Benefits by Perspective
Taxpayer Benefits by Source of Value
|Benefits Minus Costs Over Time (Cumulative 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 discounted dollars. 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.|
Blythe, B., & Jayaratne, S. (2002). Michigan families first effectiveness study. Retrieved December 5, 2003, from http://www.michigan.gov/printerFriendly/0,1687,7-124--21887--,00.html
Feldman, L.H. (1991). Assessing the effectiveness of family preservation services in New Jersey within an ecological context. Trenton, NJ: New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services; Bureau of Research, Evaluation, and Quality Assurance.
Fraser, M.W., Walton, E., Lewis, R.E., Pecora, P.J., & Walton, W.K. (1996). An experiment in family reunification: Correlates of outcomes at one-year follow-up. Children and Youth Services Review, 18(4-5), 335-361.
Mitchell, C., Tovar, P., & Knitzer, J. (1989). The Bronx Homebuilders program: An evaluation of the first 45 families. New York: Bank Street College of Education.
Walton, E. (1998). In-home family-focused reunification: A six-year follow-up of a successful experiment. Social Work Research, 22(4), 205-214.