|Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant|
|Taxpayers||$5,912||Benefits minus costs||$5,213|
|Participants||$2,707||Benefit to cost ratio||$1.69|
|Others||$5,874||Chance the program will produce|
|Indirect||($1,670)||benefits greater than the costs||58 %|
|Net program cost||($7,609)|
|Benefits minus cost||$5,213|
|Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant|
|Benefits from changes to:1||Benefits to:|
|Labor market earnings associated with employment||$1,612||$3,551||$0||$0||$5,163|
|Property loss associated with alcohol abuse or dependence||$0||$3||$5||$0||$8|
|Health care associated with educational attainment||$109||($30)||($122)||$47||$3|
|Adjustment for deadweight cost of program||$0||$0||$0||($3,811)||($3,811)|
|Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant|
|Annual cost||Year dollars||Summary|
|Program costs||$7,500||2014||Present value of net program costs (in 2016 dollars)||($7,609)|
|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|
|Alcohol use in high school||2||344||-0.125||0.140||18||-0.125||0.140||28||-0.125||0.373|
|High school graduation||2||419||0.010||0.323||19||0.010||0.323||29||0.010||0.975|
|Illicit drug use in high school||2||344||0.110||0.173||18||0.110||0.173||28||0.110||0.526|
Bloom, H.S., Orr, L.L., Bell, S.H., Cave, G., Doolittle, F., Lin, W., & Bos, J. M. (1996). The benefits and costs of JTPA Title II-A programs: Key findings from the National Job Training Partnership Act study. The Journal of Human Resources, 32(3), 549-576.
Cave, G., Bos, H., Doolittle, F., & Toussaint, C. (1993). JOBSTART: Final report on a program for school dropouts. New York, NY: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
Gruenewald, P.J., Laurence, S.E., & West, B.R. (1985). National evaluation of the New Pride replication program, final report–Volume II: Client impact evaluation. Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation (PIRE).
Johnson, B.D., & Goldberg, R.T. (1982). Vocational and social rehabilitation of delinquents–A study of experimentals and controls. Journal of Offender Counseling, 6(3), 43-60.
Miller, M., Drake, E.K., He, L. (2015). The King county Education and Employment Training (EET) Program: Effect on recidivism of juvenile offenders. (Document Number 15-12-3901). Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
National Council on Crime and Delinquency. (2009). In search of evidence-based practice in juvenile corrections: An evaluation of Florida's Avon Park Youth Academy and STREET Smart Program. Madison, WI: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.
Piliavin, I., & Masters, S.H. (1981). The impact of employment programs on offenders, addicts, and problem youth: Implications from supported work. Madison: Institute for Research on Poverty, University of Wisconsin—Madison.
Quay, H.C., & Love, C.T. (1977). The effect of a juvenile diversion program on rearrests. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 4, 377-396.
Schaeffer, C.M., Henggeler, S.W., Ford, J.D., Mann, M., Chang, R., & Chapman, J.E. (2014). RCT of a promising vocational/employment program for high-risk juvenile offenders. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 46(2), 134-143.
Schochet, P.Z., Burghardt, J., & Glazerman, S. (2001). National Job Corps study: The impacts of Job Corps on participants' employment and related outcomes, (Document No. PR00-67). Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research.
Schochet, P.Z., Burghardt, J., & McConnell, S. (2008). Does Job Corps work? Impact findings from the National Job Corps study. The American Economic Review, 98(5), 1864-1886.