1 / 36

Some Facts about the Evaluation Literature

Prevention and Cost-Effectiveness in the Chicago Child-Parent Centers Arthur J Reynolds 1 , Judy A Temple 2 , Dylan L Robertson 1 , Emily A Mann 1 , Suh-Ruu Ou 1 1. University of Wisconsin-Madison 2. Northern Illinois University Society for Research in Child Development April 26, 2003.

mary-olsen
Download Presentation

Some Facts about the Evaluation Literature

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Prevention and Cost-Effectiveness in the Chicago Child-Parent CentersArthur J Reynolds1, Judy A Temple2, Dylan L Robertson1, Emily A Mann1, Suh-Ruu Ou11. University of Wisconsin-Madison2. Northern Illinois UniversitySociety for Research in Child DevelopmentApril 26, 2003

  2. Some Facts about the Evaluation Literature • Cost effectiveness rarely applied to child development programs • Effect sizes as economic “returns” • Extensive longitudinal studies of social programs are ideal for testing cost effectiveness

  3. Program Type Age at Last Follow-Up Number of Citations High/Scope Perry Preschool Program Model 27 15 Carolina Abecedarian Project Model 21 14 Houston Parent-Child Development Center Model 11 14 Yale Child Welfare Research Program Model 14 10 Chicago Child-Parent Centers Large Scale 20 9 Milwaukee Project Model 14 8 Syracuse Family Development Program Model 15 8 Early Training Project Model 20 6 Consortium for Longitudinal Studies Model 27 6 Philadelphia Project Model 18 6 Infant and Health Development Program Model 8 6 Educational Testing Service Head Start Study Large Scale 8 5 New Haven Follow-Through Study Large Scale 9 5 Elmira Prenatal/Early Infancy Project Model 17 5 Harlem Training Project Model 12 4 University of Rochester Nurse Home Visiting Program Model 4 4 Gordon Parent Education Program Model 10 3 New York State Experimental Prekindergarten Large Scale 8 3 PSID Head Start Longitudinal Study Large Scale 25 3 Most Frequently Cited Early Childhood Intervention Programs

  4. Figure. Alternative Paths Leading to Social Competence Adolescence Ages 12- Early Childhood Ages 3-9 Ages 5-12 Motivation Self-efficacy Perceived competence Persistence in learning Exogenous Conditions Gender Socio-Environmental Risk Neighborhood Attributes MA MA Social Competence Behaviors School Achievement and Performance Retention in Grade Receiving Special Education Services Delinquency and Crime Child Maltreatment Participation in Social Services Educational Attainment Developed Abilities Cognitive development Literacy skills Pre-reading/numeracy skills CA CA Program Participation Timing Duration Intensity Social Adjustment Classroom adjustment Peer relations Self-regulating skills SA SA FS FS Family Support Parent-child interactions Home support for learning Participation in school Parenting skills SS MA= Motivational Advantage CA = Cognitive Advantage SA = Social Adjustment FS = Family Support SS = School Support SS School Support Quality of school environment Classroom environment School-level performance

  5. Child-Parent Centers Child-Parent Center Preschool/Kindergarten (Wing or Building) Elementary School Grades 1 to 3 Principal Head Teacher Curriculum Parent-Resources Teacher Outreach Services Parent Component Curriculum Component Health Services Parent Component Curriculum Component School-Wide Services Reduced Class Size Teacher Aides Instructional Materials Individualized instruction Inservices School-Community Representative Resource Mobilization Home Visitation Parent Conferences Parent Resource Teacher Parent Room Activities Classroom Volunteering School Activities Home Support Language Focus Small Class Sizes Inservice Training Health Screening Nursing Services Free + Reduced- Price meals Parent Room Activities Classroom Volunteering School Activities Home Support Health Services School-Community Representative Free + Reduced- Price meals Resource Mobilization Age 3 To Age 9

  6. Johnson Child-Parent Center

  7. Chicago Longitudinal Study • 989 complete cohort of children graduating from Child-Parent Centers in kindergarten; they participated from 2 to 6 years. Centers are located in the highest poverty areas of Chicago. • 550 children enrolled in an alternative early childhood program in kindergarten in five randomly selected schools and other schools serving low-income families. They matched on eligibility for Title I programs and socioeconomic status.

  8. Characteristics of Program and Comparison Groups

  9. Characteristics CPC Preschool Group (N=858) No-Preschool Group (N=456) P-value Percent girls 53.0 47.0 .03* Percent Black 94.2 92.8 .32 Percent parents not completed high school at child age 8 40.6 46.2 .08 Percent single parent at age 8 57.3 58.8 .63 Percent parent were teen (<19) at child’s birth 17.7 18.2 .83 Percent parent not employed at age 8 59.7 52.8 .04* Percent ever reported receiving free lunch at age 8 73.7 69.3 .09 Percent child/neglect report by age 3 1.2 2.6 .05* Percent income level is 60% + poverty for school area 77.0 71.7 .03* Percent missing data from parent education or free lunch report 15.0 18.9 .08 Family risk index (0-6) 3.1 3.0 .45 Characteristics of Preschool Group and Comparison Group (March, 2001)

  10. Equivalence of Program and Comparison Groups

  11. School Readiness Skills

  12. Adjusted Group Differences for Measures of Child Well Being in the Chicago Longitudinal Study

  13. Special Education Placement by Age 18

  14. Rates of High School Completion by Groups Note. Adjusted for gender, race, family risk index, follow-on participation, and CPC sites.

  15. High School Completion Categories by Group Graduation GED

  16. Benefit-Cost AnalysisBenefit Categories • School Remedial Services • Reduced Costs of Special Education Services • Reduced Expenditures for Extra Schooling for Retained Students • Child Welfare System • Reduced Treatment and Administrative Costs • Cost savings to Victims • Juvenile Court and Treatment Costs • Reduced Administrative Costs • Reduced Costs of Juvenile Treatment • Savings to Crime Victims

  17. Benefit Categories (cont.) • Adult Courts and Treatments • Reduced Administrative Costs • Reduced Costs of Treatment • Savings to Crime Victims • Life Time Earnings Capacity (Projected from HS Completion) • Increased Earnings Through Age 65 • Increased Tax Revenues to Governments

  18. Program Costs Per Participant vs. Selected Yearly Costs (1998) • Preschool ($6,692) vs. Special education, $7,791 • School-age ($2,981) vs. Juvenile institution, $32,237 • Extended ($10,000) vs. Child welfare services, $9,492

  19. Major Categories of Costs in the Chicago Child-Parent Centers: Preschool and School-Age Components (1998 dollars)

  20. Procedures and Examples 1. Estimate the program effect (Example: .70 fewer years in special ed) 2. Convert to 1998 dollars (Example: $7,791 (i.e., adjust for inflation)) 3. Estimate benefit at the time of program entry (age 3) using an annual discount rate of 3% (Example: $5,971) This is the Present Value of Benefits in 1998 dollars. The Program Economic Benefit Per Participant is .7 (5,971) = $4,180.

  21. Summary of CBA Findings Per Participant Note. Present value in 1998 dollars discounted at 3%

  22. Benefits of CPC Preschool by Category

  23. Estimated Benefits and Costs: Preschool

  24. Estimated Benefits and Costs: School-Age

  25. Estimated Benefits and Costs: Extended

  26. Government and Participants Savings

  27. Benefit to Cost Ratios for 3 Measures of Participation

  28. Sensitivity of Estimated Total and General Public Benefits and Cost of the Preschool program

  29. Sensitivity of Estimated Total and General Public Benefits and Cost of the Extended Program

  30. Benefit-Cost Ratios for Total Benefit of 4 Programs Notes: 1) High/Scope Perry Preschool cost benefit amounts are in 1992 dollars; discounted at 3%. Benefits include averted intangible crime victim costs. 2) Chicago Child Parent Center (CPC) cost benefit amounts are in 1998 dollars; discounted at 3%. 3) Elmira PEIP cost benefit amounts are in 1996 dollars; discounted at 4%.

  31. Early Childhood Variables Ages 5-9 Middle Childhood Ages 9-12 Adolescence Age 12- Grade Retention by Age 15 -.39 -.29 Covariates Gender Socio-Environmental Risk Black -.20 .16 -.15 Attended Magnet Schools , Ages 10-14 ITBS Word analysis in Kindergarten .11 High School Completion by Age 20 (Sep, 2000) .16 -.24 .15 .21 .33 Preschool Participation Number of school moves -.12 .32 -.14 -.23 .12 Classroom adjustment, Age 9 .13 .11 .28 School Commitment, ages 10 or 15 Parents’ Participation in school, Ages 8-12 .10 R2 = .34 .13 -.08 -.11 RMSEA= 0.055 AGFI= 0.95 Abuse/neglect repot, Ages 4-12 -.14 LISREL mediation model for high school completion, coefficients are standardized and adjusted for measurement errors

  32. Early Childhood Variables Ages 5-9 Middle Childhood Ages 9-12 Adolescence Age 12- Grade Retention by Age 15 -.38 -.26 Covariates Gender Socio-Environmental Risk Race/Ethnicity -.20 .15 Attended Magnet Schools, Ages 10-14 ITBS Word Analysis in Kindergarten .11 Any Arrest petition by age 18 -.19 .16 -.26 .24 .33 Preschool Participation Number of School Moves, Ages 10-14 .30 -.15 -.23 .12 Classroom Adjustment, Age 9 .10 -.13 .28 School Commitment, Ages 10 or 15 -.09 Parents’ Participation in School, Ages 8-12 .12 R2 = .35 -.10 Abuse/neglect Report, Ages 4-12 -.13 LISREL Mediation Model for Any Arrest Petition by Age 18, Coefficients are Standardized and Adjusted for Measurement Errors RMSEA= 0.052 AGFI= 0.95

  33. Percentage of Total Indirect Effect of Preschool Accounted for by Mediators

  34. Implications of Chicago Study • Early childhood programs are among the most effective preventive interventions. Evidence of benefit-cost analysis suggests the long-term payoff of such approaches. • Length of program participation can matter as much as timing. Services should better reflect this principle. • Implement intensive parent programs through staffed parent-resource rooms and emphasis on personal development and school participation.

  35. Implications of Chicago Study (cont.) • Focus enrichment on school readiness, especially language and literacy skills through relatively structured, activity-based approaches. • Focus school-age programs on school organization and instructional resources through such elements as reduced class sizes and child-teacher ratios, and instructional coordination. • Study the strengths and limitations of universal access to early care and education programs. Quality and effectiveness will depend on successin A. Coordinating services B. Recruiting and keeping well-trained staff C. Tailoring services to the needs of families.

  36. For more information about the Chicago Longitudinal Study, contact: Arthur J. Reynolds Waisman Center University of Wisconsin-Madison 1500 Highland Avenue Madison, WI 53705 Telephone: 608-263-1847 Fax: 608-262-3821 E-mail: areynolds@waisman.wisc.edu Web Site: www.waisman.wisc.edu/cls/

More Related