|Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant|
|Taxpayers||$138||Benefits minus costs||$81|
|Participants||$274||Benefit to cost ratio||$1.25|
|Others||$162||Chance the program will produce|
|Indirect||($164)||benefits greater than the costs||49 %|
|Net program cost||($329)|
|Benefits minus cost||$81|
|Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant|
|Benefits from changes to:1||Benefits to:|
|Labor market earnings associated with high school graduation||$134||$294||$136||$0||$564|
|Health care associated with alcohol abuse or dependence||$10||$2||$9||$5||$25|
|Property loss associated with alcohol abuse or dependence||$0||$0||$1||$0||$1|
|Costs of higher education||($15)||($22)||($7)||($7)||($51)|
|Adjustment for deadweight cost of program||$0||$0||$0||($166)||($166)|
|Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant|
|Annual cost||Year dollars||Summary|
|Program costs||$328||2014||Present value of net program costs (in 2015 dollars)||($329)|
|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|
|Cannabis use in high school||4||596||-0.025||0.113||18||-0.003||0.170||20||-0.025||0.825|
|Youth binge drinking||5||854||-0.099||0.068||17||-0.014||0.102||19||-0.099||0.145|
Bernstein, E., Edwards, E., Dorfman, D., Heeren, T., Bliss, C., & Bernstein, J. (2009). Screening and brief intervention to reduce marijuana use among youth and young adults in a pediatric emergency department. Academic Emergency Medicine : Official Journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, 16(11), 1174-85.
Bernstein, J., Heeren, T., Edward, E., Dorfman, D., Bliss, C., Winter, M., & Bernstein, E. (2010). A brief motivational interview in a pediatric emergency department, plus 10-day telephone follow-up, increases attempts to quit drinking among youth and young adults who screen positive for problematic drinking. Academic Emergency Medicine : Official Journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, 17(8), 890-902.
D'Amico, E.J., Miles, J.N.V., Stern, S.A., & Meredith, L.S. (2008). Brief motivational interviewing for teens at risk of substance use consequences: A randomized pilot study in a primary care clinic. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 35(1), 53-61.
Haller, D.M., Meynard, A., Lefebvre, D., Ukoumunne, O.C., Narring, F., & Broers, B. (2014). Effectiveness of training family physicians to deliver a brief intervention to address excessive substance use among young patients: a cluster randomized controlled trial. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 186, 8.
Spirito, A., Monti, P.M., Barnett, N.P., Colby, S.M., Sindelar, H., Rohsenow, D.J., . . . Myers, M. (2004). A randomized clinical trial of a brief motivational intervention for alcohol-positive adolescents treated in an emergency department. The Journal of Pediatrics, 145(3), 396-402.
Walton, M.A., Chermack, S.T., Shope, J. T., Bingham, C.R., Zimmerman, M.A., Blow, F.C., & Cunningham, R.M. (2010). Effects of a brief intervention for reducing violence and alcohol misuse among adolescents: a randomized controlled trial. Jama, 304(5), 527-35.