|Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant|
|Taxpayers||$1,137||Benefits minus costs||$2,206|
|Participants||($831)||Benefit to cost ratio||$2.25|
|Others||$3,832||Chance the program will produce|
|Indirect||($165)||benefits greater than the costs||58 %|
|Net program cost||($1,767)|
|Benefits minus cost||$2,206|
|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 before end of high school
Any use of alcohol by the end of high school, typically between ages 14 and 18.
Cannabis use before end of high school
Any use of cannabis by the end of high school, typically between ages 14 and 18.
Any criminal conviction according to court records, sometimes measured through charges, arrests, incarceration, or self-report.
Disruptive behavior disorder symptoms
Clinical diagnosis of a disruptive behavior disorder (e.g., conduct disorder, oppositional defiant disorder) or symptoms measured on a validated scale.
Illicit drug use before end of high school
Any use of illicit drugs by the end of high school, typically between ages 14 to 18. When possible, we exclude cannabis/marijuana use disorder from this outcome.
Problem alcohol use^^
Alcohol use reflecting problem behaviors (e.g., high frequency drinking, binge drinking, or drinking that has a high impact on daily life) for individuals who do not have an alcohol use disorder.
Smoking before end of high school^^
Any smoking of tobacco by the end of high school, typically between ages 14 and 18.
STD risky behavior^
For youth, this outcome includes unprotected sex and other behaviors. For high-risk drug users, this also includes intravenous drug use.
|Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant|
|Affected outcome:||Resulting benefits:1||Benefits accrue to:|
|Crime||Criminal justice system||$1,120||$0||$2,788||$560||$4,467|
|Labor market earnings associated with high school graduation||$535||$1,256||$688||$0||$2,479|
|Costs of higher education||($89)||($134)||($40)||($44)||($307)|
|Disruptive behavior disorder symptoms||K-12 grade repetition||$12||$0||$0||$6||$18|
|K-12 special education||$46||$0||$0||$23||$69|
|Health care associated with disruptive behavior disorder||$390||$110||$402||$195||$1,097|
|Alcohol use before end of high school||Labor market earnings associated with alcohol abuse or dependence||($876)||($2,057)||$0||$0||($2,933)|
|Property loss associated with alcohol abuse or dependence||$0||($3)||($6)||$0||($10)|
|Mortality associated with alcohol||($1)||($3)||$0||($20)||($24)|
|Program cost||Adjustment for deadweight cost of program||$0||$0||$0||($883)||($883)|
|Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant|
|Annual cost||Year dollars||Summary|
|Program costs||$2,595||2015||Present value of net program costs (in 2018 dollars)||($1,767)|
|Comparison costs||$868||2010||Cost range (+ or -)||20 %|
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.|
Coatsworth, J.D., Santisteban, D.A., McBride, C.K, Szapocznik, J. (2001). Brief strategic family therapy versus community control: Engagement, retention, and an exploration of the moderating role of adolescent symptom severity. Family Process, 40(3), 313-313
Horigian, V.E., Feaster, D.J., Brincks, A.M., Ucha, J., Szapocznik, J., Robbins, M.S., . . . Werstlein, R. (2015). A cross-sectional assessment of the long term effects of brief strategic family therapy for adolescent substance use. American Journal on Addictions, 24(7) 637-645.
Nickel, M., Luley, J., Krawczyk, J., Nickel, C., Widermann, C., Lahmann, C., Muehlbacher, M., . . . Loew, T. (2006). Bullying girls—changes after Brief Strategic Family Therapy: A randomized, prospective, controlled trial with one-year follow-up. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 75(1), 47-55.
Robbins, M.S., Feaster, D.J., Horigian, V.E., Rohrbaugh, M., Shoham, V., Bachrach, K., Miller, M., ... & Szapocznik, J. (2011). Brief strategic family therapy versus treatment as usual: Results of a multisite randomized trial for substance using adolescents. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 79(6), 713-727.
Santisteban, D.A., Coatsworth, J.D., Perez-Vidal, A., Kurtines, W.M., Schwartz, S.J., LaPerriere, A., & Szapocznik, J. (2003). Efficacy of brief strategic family therapy in modifying Hispanic adolescent behavior problems and substance use. Journal of Family Psychology, 17(1), 121-133.