|Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant|
|Taxpayers||$3,590||Benefits minus costs||$4,888|
|Participants||$0||Benefit to cost ratio||$1.98|
|Others||$7,008||Chance the program will produce|
|Indirect||($706)||benefits greater than the costs||94 %|
|Net program cost||($5,004)|
|Benefits minus cost||$4,888|
|Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant|
|Benefits from changes to:1||Benefits to:|
|Adjustment for deadweight cost of program||$0||$0||$1||($2,494)||($2,493)|
|Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant|
|Annual cost||Year dollars||Summary|
|Program costs||$4,990||2014||Present value of net program costs (in 2015 dollars)||($5,004)|
|Comparison costs||$0||2014||Cost range (+ or -)||10 %|
|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||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|
Eisenberg, M., Riechers, L., & Arrigona, N. (2001). Evaluation of the performance of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Rehabilitation Tier Programs. Austin, TX: Criminal Justice Policy Council.
Fabelo, T. (1999). Three year recidivism tracking of offenders participating in substance abuse treatment programs. Texas Criminal Justice Policy Council.
Gransky, L.A., & Jones, R.J. (1995). Evaluation of the post-release status of substance abuse program participants. Chicago: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority.
Hall, E.A., Prendergast, M.L., Wellisch, J., Patten, M., & Cao, Y. (2004). Treating drug-abusing women prisoners: An outcomes evaluation of the Forever Free program. The Prison Journal, 84(1), 81-105.
Hanson, G. (2000). Pine Lodge intensive inpatient treatment program. Tumwater: Washington State Department of Corrections, Planning and Research Section.
Klebe, K.J., & O'Keefe, M. (2004). Outcome evaluation of the Crossroads to Freedom House and Peer I therapeutic communities (Document No. 208126). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
Knight, K., Simpson, D.D., & Hiller, M.L. (1999). Three-year reincarceration outcomes for in-prison therapeutic community treatment in Texas. The Prison Journal, 79(3), 337-351.
Messina, N., Burdon, W., & Prendergast, M. (2006). Prison-based treatment for drug-dependent women offenders: Treatment versus no treatment. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 38(sup3), 333-343.
Miller, J.M., & Miller, H.V. (2011). Considering the effectiveness of drug treatment behind bars: Findings from the South Carolina RSAT evaluation. Justice Quarterly, 28(1), 70-86.
Pealer, J.A. (2004). A community of peers—promoting behavior change: The effectiveness of a therapeutic community for juvenile male offenders in reducing recidivism. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Cincinnati, Ohio.
Pelissier, B., Rhodes, W., Saylor, W., Gaes, G., Camp, S.D., Vanyur, S.D., & Wallace, S. (2000). TRIAD drug treatment evaluation project final report of three-year outcomes: Part 1. Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of Prisons, Office of Research.
Prendergast, M.L., Hall, E.A., Wexler, H.K., Melnick, G., & Cao, Y. (2004). Amity prison-based therapeutic community: 5-year outcomes. The Prison Journal, 84(1), 36-60.
Taxman, F.S. & Spinner, D.L. (1997). Jail addiction services (JAS) demonstration project in Montgomery County, Maryland: Jail and community based substance abuse treatment program model. College Park, MD: University of Maryland.
Tunis, S., Austin, J., Morris, M., Hardyman, P., & Bolyard, M. (1996). Evaluation of drug treatment in local corrections(Document No. NCJ 159313). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
Van Stelle, K.R., & Moberg, D.P. (2004). Outcome data for MICA clients after participation in an institutional therapeutic community. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 39(1), 37-62.
Wexler, H.K., Falkin, G.P., & Lipton, D.S. (1990). Outcome evaluation of a prison therapeutic community for substance abuse treatment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17(1), 71-92.
Zhang, S.X., Roberts, R.E.L., & McCollister, K.E. (2011). Therapeutic community in a California prison: Treatment outcomes after 5 years. Crime & Delinquency, 57(1), 82-101.