Key Terms
Court-involved youth: Youth who are processed through the juvenile justice system but who are not ordered to a period of confinement in a residential or correctional facility. This includes populations of arrested youth, diverted youth, charged youth, adjudicated youth, and youth on probation or formal supervision.
Youth in state institutions: Youth who are confined in a residential or correctional facility when they participate in the program.
Youth post-release: Youth who are returning to the community following a period of confinement in a residential or correctional facility and who participate in the program after release to the community.
ALL |
META-ANALYSIS |
CITATIONS |
|
Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Benefits to: | ||||||
Taxpayers | $4,023 | Benefits minus costs | $18,144 | |||
Participants | $518 | Benefit to cost ratio | $52.60 | |||
Others | $12,246 | Chance the program will produce | ||||
Indirect | $1,708 | benefits greater than the costs | 70% | |||
Total benefits | $18,495 | |||||
Net program cost | ($352) | |||||
Benefits minus cost | $18,144 | |||||
Meta-Analysis of Program Effects | ||||||||||||
Outcomes measured | Treatment age | 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 | |||||
Crime Any criminal conviction according to court records, sometimes measured through charges, arrests, incarceration, or self-report. |
16 | 2 | 105 | -0.118 | 0.236 | 17 | -0.118 | 0.236 | 25 | -0.118 | 0.617 | |
Externalizing behavior symptoms^^ Symptoms of externalizing behavior (e.g., aggressive, hostile, or disruptive behavior) measured on a validated scale. |
16 | 1 | 46 | -0.542 | 0.268 | 16 | n/a | n/a | n/a | -0.542 | 0.029 | |
Internalizing symptoms^^ Symptoms of internalizing behavior (e.g., sadness, anxiety, or withdrawal) measured on a validated scale. |
16 | 1 | 46 | -0.378 | 0.246 | 16 | n/a | n/a | n/a | -0.378 | 0.124 | |
Suicidal ideation^ Thinking about and/or planning death by suicide. |
16 | 1 | 46 | -0.339 | 0.246 | 16 | n/a | n/a | n/a | -0.339 | 0.168 |
Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant | ||||||
Affected outcome: | Resulting benefits:1 | Benefits accrue to: | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Taxpayers | Participants | Others2 | Indirect3 | Total |
||
Crime | Criminal justice system | $3,824 | $0 | $11,938 | $1,912 | $17,673 |
Labor market earnings associated with high school graduation | $257 | $605 | $334 | $0 | $1,196 | |
Costs of higher education | ($57) | ($86) | ($26) | ($29) | ($198) | |
Program cost | Adjustment for deadweight cost of program | $0 | $0 | $0 | ($176) | ($176) |
Totals | $4,023 | $518 | $12,246 | $1,708 | $18,495 | |
Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant | ||||
Annual cost | Year dollars | Summary | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Program costs | $310 | 2018 | Present value of net program costs (in 2022 dollars) | ($352) |
Comparison costs | $0 | 2018 | Cost range (+ or -) | 50% |
Benefits Minus Costs |
Benefits by Perspective |
Taxpayer Benefits by Source of Value |
Benefits Minus Costs Over Time (Cumulative 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 discounted dollars. 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. |
Bottcher, J. (1985). The Athena Program: An evaluation of a girl’s treatment program at the Fresno County Probation Department’s Juvenile Hall. Sacramento: California Youth Authority.
Hubbard, D.J., & Latessa, E.J. (2004). Evaluation of cognitive-behavioral programs for offenders: A look at outcome and responsivity in five treatment programs (Final report). Cincinnati: University of Cincinnati, Division of Criminal Justice, Center for Criminal Justice Research.
Rohde, P., Jorgensen, J.S., Seeley, J.R., & Mace, D.E. (2004). Pilot evaluation of the coping course: A cognitive-behavioral intervention to enhance coping skills in incarcerated youth. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 43 (6), 669-676.