skip to main content
Washington State Institute for Public Policy
Back Button

Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) for families in the child welfare system

Child Welfare
Benefit-cost methods last updated December 2019.  Literature review updated August 2017.
Open PDF
Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) in child welfare populations has been successfully tested with the addition of a group motivational component to increase engagement and success of the parent. As in standard PCIT, over the course of 12 to 14 sessions, a therapist directly observes a parent and child through a one-way mirror, and provides direct coaching to the parent through a radio earphone. The focus is building the skills of the parent to more positively interact with the child and manage his or her behavior.
 
ALL
BENEFIT-COST
META-ANALYSIS
CITATIONS
For an overview of WSIPP's Benefit-Cost Model, please see this guide. The estimates shown are present value, life cycle benefits and costs. All dollars are expressed in the base year chosen for this analysis (2018). The chance the benefits exceed the costs are derived from a Monte Carlo risk analysis. The details on this, as well as the economic discount rates and other relevant parameters are described in our Technical Documentation.
Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant
Benefits to:
Taxpayers $9,678 Benefits minus costs $21,556
Participants $13,778 Benefit to cost ratio $13.46
Others $1,482 Chance the program will produce
Indirect ($1,653) benefits greater than the costs 96 %
Total benefits $23,286
Net program cost ($1,730)
Benefits minus cost $21,556

Meta-analysis is a statistical method to combine the results from separate studies on a program, policy, or topic in order to estimate its effect on an outcome. WSIPP systematically evaluates all credible evaluations we can locate on each topic. The outcomes measured are the types of program impacts that were measured in the research literature (for example, crime or educational attainment). Treatment N represents the total number of individuals or units in the treatment group across the included studies.

An effect size (ES) is a standard metric that summarizes the degree to which a program or policy affects a measured outcome. If the effect size is positive, the outcome increases. If the effect size is negative, the outcome decreases. See Estimating Program Effects Using Effect Sizes for additional information.

Adjusted effect sizes are used to calculate the benefits from our benefit cost model. WSIPP may adjust effect sizes based on methodological characteristics of the study. For example, we may adjust effect sizes when a study has a weak research design or when the program developer is involved in the research. The magnitude of these adjustments varies depending on the topic area.

WSIPP may also adjust the second ES measurement. Research shows the magnitude of some effect sizes decrease over time. For those effect sizes, we estimate outcome-based adjustments which we apply between the first time ES is estimated and the second time ES is estimated. We also report the unadjusted effect size to show the effect sizes before any adjustments have been made. More details about these adjustments can be found in our Technical Documentation.

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
Child abuse and neglect
Substantiated or founded reports to child protective services.
 8 2 78 -0.718 0.237 10 -0.718 0.237 17 -0.718 0.001
1In addition to the outcomes measured in the meta-analysis table, WSIPP measures benefits and costs estimated from other outcomes associated with those reported in the evaluation literature. For example, empirical research demonstrates that high school graduation leads to reduced crime. These associated measures provide a more complete picture of the detailed costs and benefits of the program.

2“Others” includes benefits to people other than taxpayers and participants. Depending on the program, it could include reductions in crime victimization, the economic benefits from a more educated workforce, and the benefits from employer-paid health insurance.

3“Indirect benefits” includes estimates of the net changes in the value of a statistical life and net changes in the deadweight costs of taxation.
Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant
Affected outcome: Resulting benefits:1 Benefits accrue to:
Taxpayers Participants Others2 Indirect3 Total
Child abuse and neglect Criminal justice system $532 $0 $1,142 $266 $1,939
Child abuse and neglect $2,274 $288 $0 $1,137 $3,699
K-12 grade repetition $70 $0 $0 $35 $104
K-12 special education $772 $0 $0 $386 $1,158
Property loss associated with alcohol abuse or dependence $0 $1 $1 $0 $2
Health care associated with PTSD $328 $93 $339 $164 $924
Labor market earnings associated with child abuse & neglect $5,699 $13,387 $0 ($2,850) $16,237
Mortality associated with child abuse and neglect $4 $9 $0 $74 $87
Program cost Adjustment for deadweight cost of program $0 $0 $0 ($865) ($865)
Totals $9,678 $13,778 $1,482 ($1,653) $23,286
Click here to see populations selected
Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant
Annual cost Year dollars Summary
Program costs $2,440 2007 Present value of net program costs (in 2018 dollars) ($1,730)
Comparison costs $1,000 2007 Cost range (+ or -) 10 %
This program is typically delivered over a three- to four-month period. Standard PCIT expenditures provided by Washington DSHS Children's Administration (average reimbursement rate per family receiving PCIT in 2007). WSIPP also estimated costs of the additional group motivational component; families receive an average of 5.2 motivational session. (Chaffin, M., Funderburk, B., Bard, D., Valle, L. A., & Gurwitch, R. (2011). A combined motivation and parent-child interaction therapy package reduces child welfare recidivism in a randomized dismantling field trial. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 79(1), 84-95.) Cost per family for the motivational component is estimated by multiplying 5.2 sessions by $36.64, the average rate paid for group treatment in Washington in 2011.
The figures shown are estimates of the costs to implement programs in Washington. The comparison group costs reflect either no treatment or treatment as usual, depending on how effect sizes were calculated in the meta-analysis. The cost range reported above reflects potential variation or uncertainty in the cost estimate; more detail can be found in our Technical Documentation.
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.

Citations Used in the Meta-Analysis

Chaffin, M., Silovsky, J.F., Funderburk, B., Valle, L.A., Brestan, E.V., Balachova, T., . . . Bonner, B.L. (2004). Parent-child interaction therapy with physically abusive parents: Efficacy for reducing future abuse reports. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72(3), 500-510.

Chaffin, M., Funderburk, B., Bard, D., Valle, L.A., & Gurwitch, R. (2011). A combined motivation and parent-child interaction therapy package reduces child welfare recidivism in a randomized dismantling field trial. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 79 (1),84-95.