skip to main content
Washington State Institute for Public Policy
Back Button

Child-Parent Center (CPC)

Pre-K to 12 Education
Benefit-cost methods last updated December 2023.  Literature review updated April 2020.
Open PDF
Child-Parent Center (CPC) is a school- and family-based program that provides educational and family support services to economically and educationally disadvantaged children. CPC aims to enhance school success, social competence, economic self-sufficiency, and general health. CPC includes activities designed to promote academic and social success, parental involvement in school, and aid in the transition into kindergarten and elementary school. The CPC preschool program is three hours daily, for five days a week, with the classroom teacher performing all instruction and family services. Children are typically in the program for two or more years. Each parent is required to spend at least a half-day per week in the center during preschool and kindergarten.
For an overview of WSIPP's Benefit-Cost Model, please see this guide. The estimates shown are present value, life cycle benefits and costs. All dollars are expressed in the base year chosen for this analysis (2022). The chance the benefits exceed the costs are derived from a Monte Carlo risk analysis. The details on this, as well as the economic discount rates and other relevant parameters are described in our Technical Documentation.
Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant
Benefits to:
Taxpayers $19,560 Benefits minus costs $36,525
Participants $16,986 Benefit to cost ratio $4.18
Others $10,571 Chance the program will produce
Indirect $903 benefits greater than the costs 91%
Total benefits $48,020
Net program cost ($11,495)
Benefits minus cost $36,525

Meta-analysis is a statistical method to combine the results from separate studies on a program, policy, or topic in order to estimate its effect on an outcome. WSIPP systematically evaluates all credible evaluations we can locate on each topic. The outcomes measured are the types of program impacts that were measured in the research literature (for example, crime or educational attainment). Treatment N represents the total number of individuals or units in the treatment group across the included studies.

An effect size (ES) is a standard metric that summarizes the degree to which a program or policy affects a measured outcome. If the effect size is positive, the outcome increases. If the effect size is negative, the outcome decreases. See Estimating Program Effects Using Effect Sizes for additional information.

Adjusted effect sizes are used to calculate the benefits from our benefit cost model. WSIPP may adjust effect sizes based on methodological characteristics of the study. For example, we may adjust effect sizes when a study has a weak research design or when the program developer is involved in the research. The magnitude of these adjustments varies depending on the topic area.

WSIPP may also adjust the second ES measurement. Research shows the magnitude of some effect sizes decrease over time. For those effect sizes, we estimate outcome-based adjustments which we apply between the first time ES is estimated and the second time ES is estimated. We also report the unadjusted effect size to show the effect sizes before any adjustments have been made. More details about these adjustments can be found in our Technical Documentation.

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
3 1 893 -0.446 0.147 13 -0.446 0.147 13 -0.446 0.002
3 1 893 0.229 0.158 18 0.229 0.158 18 0.229 0.146
3 1 893 -0.401 0.170 16 -0.401 0.170 16 -0.401 0.018
3 1 722 -0.014 0.090 17 -0.014 0.090 27 -0.014 0.877
3 1 893 -0.394 0.196 15 -0.394 0.196 17 -0.394 0.044
3 1 893 -0.319 0.265 15 -0.319 0.265 17 -0.319 0.229
3 1 893 -0.209 0.184 22 -0.209 0.184 32 -0.209 0.258
3 1 852 0.191 0.058 12 0.147 0.064 17 0.191 0.001
1In addition to the outcomes measured in the meta-analysis table, WSIPP measures benefits and costs estimated from other outcomes associated with those reported in the evaluation literature. For example, empirical research demonstrates that high school graduation leads to reduced crime. These associated measures provide a more complete picture of the detailed costs and benefits of the program.

2“Others” includes benefits to people other than taxpayers and participants. Depending on the program, it could include reductions in crime victimization, the economic benefits from a more educated workforce, and the benefits from employer-paid health insurance.

3“Indirect benefits” includes estimates of the net changes in the value of a statistical life and net changes in the deadweight costs of taxation.
Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant
Affected outcome: Resulting benefits:1 Benefits accrue to:
Taxpayers Participants Others2 Indirect3 Total
Crime Criminal justice system $1,332 $0 $2,705 $666 $4,703
Test scores Labor market earnings associated with test scores $6,291 $14,821 $7,811 $0 $28,923
Child abuse and neglect Child abuse and neglect $203 $2,148 $0 $101 $2,452
Property loss associated with alcohol abuse or dependence $0 $0 $1 $0 $1
Mortality associated with child abuse and neglect $1 $2 $0 $17 $20
K-12 grade repetition K-12 grade repetition $537 $0 $0 $269 $806
K-12 special education K-12 special education $10,802 $0 $0 $5,401 $16,202
Out-of-home placement Out-of-home placement $342 $0 $0 $171 $513
Regular smoking Health care associated with smoking $52 $15 $54 $26 $146
Program cost Adjustment for deadweight cost of program $0 $0 $0 ($5,747) ($5,747)
Totals $19,560 $16,986 $10,571 $903 $48,020
Click here to see populations selected
Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant
Annual cost Year dollars Summary
Program costs $5,597 2007 Present value of net program costs (in 2022 dollars) ($11,495)
Comparison costs $0 2007 Cost range (+ or -) 30%
To estimate the per-participant cost for Child-Parent Centers (CPC), we use the annual cost and multiply it by the average length of time that children spend in CPC in the studies included in our meta-analysis, approximately 1.55 years. We use the annual cost information reported in Reynolds, A.J., Temple, J.A., White, B.A., Ou, S.R., & Robertson, D.L. (2011). Age-26 cost-benefit analysis of the child-parent center early education program. Child Development, 82(1), 379-404.
The figures shown are estimates of the costs to implement programs in Washington. The comparison group costs reflect either no treatment or treatment as usual, depending on how effect sizes were calculated in the meta-analysis. The cost range reported above reflects potential variation or uncertainty in the cost estimate; more detail can be found in our Technical Documentation.
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.

Citations Used in the Meta-Analysis

Reynolds, A.J., Temple, J.A., Robertson, D.L., & Mann, E.A. (2002). Age 21 cost-benefit analysis of the Title I Chicago Child-Parent Centers. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(4), 267-303.

Reynolds, A.J., Temple, J.A., White, B.A., Ou, S.R., & Robertson, D.L. (2011). Age-26 cost-benefit analysis of the child-parent center early education program. Child Development, 82(1), 379-404.

Topitzes, J., Mersky, J.P., Godes, O., Ceglarek, S., & Reynolds, A.J. (2009). Educational success and adult health: Findings from the chicago longitudinal study. Prevention Science, 10(2), 175-195.