|Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant|
|Taxpayers||$19||Benefits minus costs||($2,997)|
|Participants||$17||Benefit to cost ratio||($0.45)|
|Others||$20||Chance the program will produce|
|Indirect||($988)||benefits greater than the costs||39 %|
|Net program cost||($2,065)|
|Benefits minus cost||($2,997)|
|Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant|
|Benefits from changes to:1||Benefits to:|
|Labor market earnings associated with alcohol abuse or dependence||$3||$8||$0||$0||$11|
|Property loss associated with alcohol abuse or dependence||$0||$1||$2||$0||$3|
|Health care associated with cannabis abuse or dependence||$11||$2||$12||$5||$30|
|Mortality associated with alcohol||$2||$5||$0||$39||$46|
|Adjustment for deadweight cost of program||$0||$0||$0||($1,033)||($1,033)|
|Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant|
|Annual cost||Year dollars||Summary|
|Program costs||$1,968||2015||Present value of net program costs (in 2018 dollars)||($2,065)|
|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||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|
|Alcohol use disorder||16||3||249||-0.296||0.111||16||0.000||0.187||19||-0.296||0.008|
|Cannabis use before end of high school^^||16||1||80||-0.340||0.262||16||n/a||n/a||n/a||-0.340||0.194|
|Cannabis use disorder||16||2||169||-0.154||0.150||16||0.000||0.187||19||-0.154||0.304|
|Substance use disorder^||16||3||397||-0.141||0.128||16||n/a||n/a||n/a||-0.141||0.272|
Garner, B.R., Godley, M.D., Funk, R.R., Lee, M.T., & Garnick, D.W. (2010). The Washington Circle continuity of care performance measure: Predictive validity with adolescents discharged from residential treatment. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 38(1), 3-11.
Godley, M.D., Godley, S.H., Dennis, M.L., Funk, R.R., & Passetti, LL. (2007). Research report: The effect of assertive continuing care on continuing care linkage, adherence and abstinence following residential treatment for adolescents with substance use disorders. Addiction, 102(1), 81-93.
Godley, M.D., Godley, S.H., Dennis, M.L., Funk, R.R., Passetti, L.L., & Petry, N.M. (2014). A randomized trial of Assertive Continuing Care and Contingency Management for adolescents with substance use disorders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 82(1),40-51.
Godley, S.H., Garner, B.R., Passetti, L.L., Funk, R.R., Dennis, M.L., & Godley, M.D. (2010). Adolescent outpatient treatment and continuing care: Main findings from a randomized clinical trial. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 110(1), 44-54.
Kaminer, Y., Burleson, J.A., & Burke, R.H. (2008). Efficacy of outpatient aftercare for adolescents with alcohol use disorders: A randomized controlled study. Journal of American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 47(12), 1405-1412.