Key Terms
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.
ALL |
META-ANALYSIS |
CITATIONS |
|
Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Benefits to: | ||||||
Taxpayers | ($2,848) | Benefits minus costs | ($27,675) | |||
Participants | ($1,324) | Benefit to cost ratio | ($1.40) | |||
Others | ($5,046) | Chance the program will produce | ||||
Indirect | ($6,912) | benefits greater than the costs | 2% | |||
Total benefits | ($16,130) | |||||
Net program cost | ($11,545) | |||||
Benefits minus cost | ($27,675) | |||||
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 | |||||
Crime Any criminal conviction according to court records, sometimes measured through charges, arrests, incarceration, or self-report. |
19 | 1 | 404 | 0.100 | 0.110 | 20 | 0.100 | 0.110 | 28 | 0.100 | 0.365 | |
Earnings* Percent change in labor market earnings, typically weekly or monthly wages. |
19 | 1 | 404 | -0.064 | 0.117 | 20 | 0.000 | 0.014 | 21 | -0.064 | 0.583 | |
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. |
19 | 1 | 330 | -0.031 | 0.086 | 19 | -0.004 | 0.128 | 21 | -0.031 | 0.720 | |
Homelessness^ A lack of stable housing, often measured through self-report of conditions like living on streets or in shelters in a given time period. |
19 | 1 | 330 | -0.161 | 0.086 | 19 | n/a | n/a | n/a | -0.161 | 0.060 | |
Enroll in any college^ Enroll in either a 2-year or 4-year higher education institution. |
19 | 1 | 404 | -0.157 | 0.125 | 20 | n/a | n/a | n/a | -0.157 | 0.209 | |
Illicit drug use^ Adult use of illicit drugs that does not rise to the level of “disordered.” When possible, we exclude cannabis/marijuana use from this outcome. |
19 | 1 | 330 | -0.021 | 0.108 | 19 | n/a | n/a | n/a | -0.021 | 0.846 |
Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant | ||||||
Affected outcome: | Resulting benefits:1 | Benefits accrue to: | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Taxpayers | Participants | Others2 | Indirect3 | Total |
||
Crime | Criminal justice system | ($2,288) | $0 | ($5,050) | ($1,144) | ($8,483) |
Problem alcohol use | Property loss associated with problem alcohol use | $0 | $0 | $1 | $0 | $1 |
Health care associated with problem alcohol use | $3 | $1 | $4 | $2 | $9 | |
Mortality associated with problem alcohol | $0 | $0 | $0 | $3 | $3 | |
Earnings | Labor market earnings | ($563) | ($1,325) | $0 | $0 | ($1,888) |
Program cost | Adjustment for deadweight cost of program | $0 | $0 | $0 | ($5,773) | ($5,773) |
Totals | ($2,848) | ($1,324) | ($5,046) | ($6,912) | ($16,130) | |
Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant | ||||
Annual cost | Year dollars | Summary | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Program costs | $9,690 | 2015 | Present value of net program costs (in 2022 dollars) | ($11,545) |
Comparison costs | $0 | 2015 | 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. |
Skemer, M. & Valentine, E.J. (2016). Striving for Independence: Two-Year Impact Findings from the Youth Villages Transitional Living Evaluation. New York, NY: MDRC.
Valentine, E.J., Skemer, M., & Courtney, M.E. (2015). Becoming Adults: One-Year Impact Findings from the Youth Villages Transitional Living Evaluation. New York, NY: MDRC.