|Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant|
|Taxpayers||$354||Benefits minus costs||$1,161|
|Participants||$611||Benefit to cost ratio||$8.42|
|Others||$397||Chance the program will produce|
|Indirect||($43)||benefits greater than the costs||86 %|
|Net program cost||($157)|
|Benefits minus cost||$1,161|
|Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant|
|Benefits from changes to:1||Benefits to:|
|Labor market earnings associated with high school graduation||$283||$622||$285||$0||$1,190|
|Health care associated with smoking||$101||$33||$125||$50||$308|
|Costs of higher education||($30)||($45)||($13)||($15)||($102)|
|Adjustment for deadweight cost of program||$0||$0||$0||($78)||($78)|
|Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant|
|Annual cost||Year dollars||Summary|
|Program costs||$53||2015||Present value of net program costs (in 2016 dollars)||($157)|
|Comparison costs||$0||2015||Cost range (+ or -)||30 %|
|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|
|Sales to minors (tobacco)^||4||123||-0.324||0.153||12||n/a||n/a||n/a||-0.709||0.001|
|Smoking before end of middle school||2||2882||-0.017||0.028||12||-0.017||0.028||15||-0.051||0.067|
|Smoking in high school||2||2261||-0.047||0.035||15||-0.047||0.035||18||-0.145||0.001|
Altman, D.G., Wheelis, A.Y., McFarlane, M., Lee, H.-R., & Fortmann, S.P. (1999). The relationship between tobacco access and use among adolescents: a four community study. Social Science & Medicine, 48(6), 759-775.
Biglan, A., Henderson, J., Humphrey, D., Yasui, M., Whisman, R., Black, C., James, L. (1995). Mobilising positive reinforcement to reduce youth access to tobacco. Tobacco Control, 4(1), 42-48.
Biglan, A., Ary, D., Koehn, V., Levings, D., Smith, S., Wright, Z., James, L., & Henderson, J. (1996). Mobilizing positive reinforcement in communities to reduce youth access to tobacco. American Journal of Community Psychology, 24(5), 625-638.
Biglan, A., Arvy, D.V., Smolkowski, K., Duncan, T., & Black, C. (2000). A randomized controlled trial of a community intervention to prevent adolescent tobacco use. Tobacco Control, 9, 24-32.
Chen, V., & Forster, J.L. (2006). The long-term effect of local policies to restrict retail sale of tobacco to youth. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 8(3), 371-377.
Perry, C.L., Komro, K.A., Veblen-Mortenson, S., Bosma, L.M., Farbakhsh, K., Munson, K.A., et al. (2003). A randomized controlled trial of the middle and junior high school D.A.R.E. and D.A.R.E. Plus programs. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 157(2), 178-184.