ALL |
META-ANALYSIS |
CITATIONS |
|
Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Benefits to: | ||||||
Taxpayers | $2,701 | Benefits minus costs | $8,523 | |||
Participants | $5,732 | Benefit to cost ratio | $4.04 | |||
Others | $4,285 | Chance the program will produce | ||||
Indirect | ($1,390) | benefits greater than the costs | 65% | |||
Total benefits | $11,328 | |||||
Net program cost | ($2,805) | |||||
Benefits minus cost | $8,523 | |||||
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 | |||||||||||
ES | SE | Age | ES | SE | Age | ES | p-value | |||||
Grade point average^ Non-standardized measure of student performance calculated across subjects. |
15 | 3 | 322 | 0.047 | 0.087 | 17 | n/a | n/a | n/a | 0.106 | 0.226 | |
High school graduation On-time completion of high school with a diploma (excluding GED attainment). |
15 | 2 | 758 | 0.101 | 0.143 | 18 | 0.101 | 0.143 | 18 | 0.293 | 0.040 | |
Office discipline referrals^ Referrals of a student to an administrative office for disciplinary reasons. |
15 | 1 | 179 | 0.048 | 0.124 | 15 | n/a | n/a | n/a | 0.125 | 0.316 | |
School attendance^ Number or percentage of school days present in a given enrollment period. |
15 | 1 | 76 | 0.186 | 0.224 | 16 | n/a | n/a | n/a | 0.186 | 0.406 | |
Alcohol use before end of middle school Any use of alcohol by the end of middle school, typically by age 13. |
15 | 2 | 311 | -0.109 | 0.204 | 16 | -0.109 | 0.204 | 18 | -0.134 | 0.511 | |
Cannabis use before end of middle school Any use of cannabis by the end of middle school, typically by age 13. |
15 | 1 | 76 | -0.260 | 0.225 | 16 | -0.260 | 0.225 | 18 | -0.260 | 0.246 | |
Crime Any criminal conviction according to court records, sometimes measured through charges, arrests, incarceration, or self-report. |
15 | 4 | 886 | -0.051 | 0.098 | 17 | -0.051 | 0.098 | 27 | -0.258 | 0.289 |
Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant | ||||||
Affected outcome: | Resulting benefits:1 | Benefits accrue to: | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Taxpayers | Participants | Others2 | Indirect3 | Total |
||
Crime | Criminal justice system | $396 | $0 | $991 | $198 | $1,584 |
High school graduation | Labor market earnings associated with high school graduation | $2,694 | $6,347 | $3,455 | $0 | $12,497 |
Costs of higher education | ($411) | ($622) | ($187) | ($205) | ($1,425) | |
Cannabis use before end of middle school | Health care associated with cannabis abuse or dependence | $21 | $4 | $23 | $11 | $59 |
Alcohol use before end of middle school | Property loss associated with alcohol abuse or dependence | $0 | $1 | $3 | $0 | $4 |
Mortality associated with alcohol | $1 | $1 | $0 | $9 | $11 | |
Program cost | Adjustment for deadweight cost of program | $0 | $0 | $0 | ($1,403) | ($1,403) |
Totals | $2,701 | $5,732 | $4,285 | ($1,390) | $11,328 | |
Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant | ||||
Annual cost | Year dollars | Summary | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Program costs | $2,378 | 2016 | Present value of net program costs (in 2022 dollars) | ($2,805) |
Comparison costs | $0 | 2016 | Cost range (+ or -) | 40% |
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. |
Aseltine, R.H., Dupre, M., & Lamlein, P. (2000). Mentoring as a drug prevention strategy: An evaluation of Across Ages. Adolescent and Family Health 1(1), 11-20.
Blakely, C.H., Menon, R., & Jones, D.J. (1995). Project BELONG: Final report. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University, Public Policy Research Institute.
Buman, B., & Cain, R. (1991). The impact of short term, work oriented mentoring on the employability of low-income youth. Minneapolis, MN: Minneapolis Employment and Training Program.
Cave, G., & Quint, J. (1990). Career Beginnings impact evaluation: Findings from a program for disadvantaged high school students. New York, NY: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
Hanlon, T.E., Bateman, R.W., Simon, B.D., O'Grady, K.E., & Carswell, S.B. (2002). An early community-based intervention for the prevention of substance abuse and other delinquent behavior. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 31(6), 459-471.
Johnson, A. (1999). Sponsor-a-Scholar: Long-term impacts of a youth mentoring program on student performance. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research.
O'Donnell, C.R., Lydgate, T. & Fo, W.S.O. (1979). The Buddy System: Review and follow-up. Child Behavior Therapy, 1, 161-169.