META-ANALYSIS |
CITATIONS |
|
Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Benefits to: | ||||||
Taxpayers | $18 | Benefits minus costs | ($399) | |||
Participants | ($105) | Benefit to cost ratio | ($0.20) | |||
Others | $180 | Chance the program will produce | ||||
Indirect | ($158) | benefits greater than the costs | 46 % | |||
Total benefits | ($66) | |||||
Net program cost | ($333) | |||||
Benefits minus cost | ($399) | |||||
Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant | |||||
Benefits from changes to:1 | Benefits to: | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Taxpayers | Participants | Others2 | Indirect3 | Total |
|
Crime | $87 | $0 | $206 | $41 | $334 |
K-12 special education | $1 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $1 |
Property loss associated with alcohol abuse or dependence | $0 | $2 | $3 | $0 | $4 |
Labor market earnings associated with major depression | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
Health care associated with major depression | $2 | $1 | $2 | $1 | $6 |
Costs of higher education | ($71) | ($107) | ($32) | ($35) | ($246) |
Adjustment for deadweight cost of program | $0 | $0 | $0 | ($166) | ($166) |
Totals | $18 | ($105) | $180 | ($158) | ($66) |
Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant | ||||
Annual cost | Year dollars | Summary | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Program costs | $164 | 2013 | Present value of net program costs (in 2016 dollars) | ($333) |
Comparison costs | $0 | 2013 | 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 | ||||||||||
ES | SE | Age | ES | SE | Age | ES | p-value | ||||
Alcohol use before end of middle school | 1 | 386 | -0.116 | 0.208 | 13 | -0.116 | 0.208 | 15 | -0.350 | 0.092 | |
Alcohol use in high school | 1 | 500 | -0.017 | 0.152 | 18 | -0.017 | 0.152 | 18 | -0.050 | 0.741 | |
Cannabis use before end of middle school | 1 | 386 | -0.101 | 0.208 | 13 | -0.101 | 0.208 | 15 | -0.305 | 0.142 | |
Cannabis use in high school | 1 | 500 | -0.041 | 0.152 | 18 | -0.041 | 0.152 | 18 | -0.126 | 0.410 | |
Crime | 1 | 500 | -0.013 | 0.152 | 18 | -0.013 | 0.152 | 28 | -0.039 | 0.797 | |
Externalizing behavior symptoms | 1 | 500 | -0.004 | 0.152 | 17 | -0.002 | 0.079 | 20 | -0.012 | 0.939 | |
Grade point average^ | 1 | 500 | -0.020 | 0.152 | 18 | -0.020 | 0.152 | 18 | -0.062 | 0.685 | |
Major depressive disorder | 1 | 52 | -0.098 | 0.468 | 15 | 0.000 | 0.039 | 16 | -0.296 | 0.527 | |
Smoking before end of middle school | 1 | 386 | -0.240 | 0.208 | 13 | -0.240 | 0.208 | 15 | -0.727 | 0.001 | |
Smoking in high school | 1 | 500 | -0.048 | 0.152 | 14 | -0.048 | 0.152 | 18 | -0.145 | 0.342 |
Connell, A.M., & Dishion, T.J. (2008). Reducing depression among at-risk early adolescents: three-year effects of a family-centered intervention embedded within schools. Journal of Family Psychology (division 43), 22(4), 574-85.
Connell, A.M., Dishion, T.J., Yasui, M., & Kavanagh, K. (2007). An adaptive approach to family intervention: linking engagement in family-centered intervention to reductions in adolescent problem behavior. Journal of Consulting Clinical Psychology, 75, 568-579.
Stormshak, E.A., Connell, A., & Dishion, T.J. (2009). An adaptive approach to family-centered intervention in schools: Linking intervention engagement to academic outcomes in middle and high school. Prevention Science, 10(3), 221-235.
Stormshak, E.A., Connell, A.M., Veronneau, M.H., Myers, M.W., Dishion, T.J., Kavanagh, K., & Caruthers, A.S. (2011). An ecological approach to promoting early adolescent mental health and social adaptation: Family-centered intervention in public middle schools. Child Development, 82(1), 209-225.
Van, R.M.J., & Dishion, T.J. (2012). The impact of a family-centered intervention on the ecology of adolescent antisocial behavior: modeling developmental sequelae and trajectories during adolescence. Development and Psychopathology, 24(3), 1139-55.