Court-involved youth: Youth who are processed through the juvenile justice system but who are not ordered to a period of confinement in a residential or correctional facility. This includes populations of arrested youth, diverted youth, charged youth, adjudicated youth, and youth on probation or formal supervision.
Youth in state institutions: Youth who are confined in a residential or correctional facility when they participate in the program.
Youth post-release: Youth who are returning to the community following a period of confinement in a residential or correctional facility and who participate in the program after release to the community.
|Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant|
|Taxpayers||$1,984||Benefits minus costs||$9,902|
|Participants||$620||Benefit to cost ratio||n/a|
|Others||$4,082||Chance the program will produce|
|Indirect||$1,630||benefits greater than the costs||99 %|
|Net program cost||$1,585|
|Benefits minus cost||$9,902|
|Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant|
|Benefits from changes to:1||Benefits to:|
|Labor market earnings associated with high school graduation||$308||$724||$400||$0||$1,432|
|Costs of higher education||($68)||($103)||($31)||($34)||($236)|
|Adjustment for deadweight cost of program||$0||$0||$0||$792||$792|
|Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant|
|Annual cost||Year dollars||Summary|
|Program costs||$0||2016||Present value of net program costs (in 2018 dollars)||$1,585|
|Comparison costs||$1,510||2015||Cost range (+ or -)||20 %|
|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|
Dunford, F.W., Osgood, D.W, & Weichselbaum, H.F. (1982). National evaluation of diversion projects, final report. U.S. Department of Justice.
Klein, M.W. (1986). Labeling theory and delinquency policy: an experimental test. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 13(1) 47-79.
Koch, J.R. (1986). Community service and outright release as alternatives to juvenile court: An experimental evaluation (Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1985). Dissertation Abstracts International, 46(07), 2081A. (University Microfilms No. 85-20537).
Severy, L.J., & Whitaker, J.M. (1982). Juvenile diversion: An experimental analysis of effectiveness. Evaluation Review, 6(6), 753-774.
Smith, E.P., Wolf, A.M., Cantillon, D.M., Thomas, O., & Davidson, W.S. (2004). The adolescent diversion project: 25 years of research on an ecological model of intervention. Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community, 27(2), 29-47.