Prevention and Cost-Effectiveness in the Chicago Child-Parent Centers Arthur J Reynolds1, Judy A Temple2, Dylan L Robertson1, Emily A Mann1, Suh-Ruu Ou1 1. University of Wisconsin-Madison 2. Northern Illinois University Society for Research in Child Development April 26, 2003

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

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

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

Child-Parent Centers Principal Child-Parent Center Preschool/Kindergarten (Wing or Building) Elementary School Grades 1 to 3 Curriculum Parent-Resources Teacher Head Teacher Outreach Services Parent Component Curriculum Health School-Wide 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 Reduced Class Size Teacher Aides Instructional Materials Individualized instruction Inservices Health Services Age 3 To Age 9

Johnson Child-Parent Center

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.

Characteristics of Program and Comparison Groups

Characteristics of Preschool Group and Comparison Group (March, 2001)   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 Percent missing data from parent education or free lunch report 15.0 18.9 Family risk index (0-6) 3.1 3.0 .45

Equivalence of Program and Comparison Groups

School Readiness Skills

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

Special Education Placement by Age 18

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

High School Completion Categories by Group Graduation GED

Benefit-Cost Analysis Benefit 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

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

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

Major Categories of Costs in the Chicago Child-Parent Centers: Preschool and School-Age Components (1998 dollars) Budget Category Preschool Program School-Age Program Instructional staff (%) $7,864,225 (43.4%) $7,849,856 (73.5%) Family and school-community staff/parent program 1,744,945 (9.6%) 25,634 (0.2%) Administration 2,288,153 (12.6%) 1,481,416 (13.9%) Parent program participation 1,421,695 (7.9%) 897,300 (8.4%) Total cost in 1998 dollars 18,100,194 10,674,231 Number of children in 25 centers/schools 4,114 6,757 Present value of weighted average cost per child 6,692 2,981

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.

Summary of CBA Findings Per Participant CPC component Cost Societal Benefit Public Benefit Preschool $6,692 $47,759 $25,771 School-Age $2,981 $4,944 $4,219 Extended $4,057 $24,772 $14,594 Note. Present value in 1998 dollars discounted at 3%

Benefits of CPC Preschool by Category

Estimated Benefits and Costs: Preschool

Estimated Benefits and Costs: School-Age

Estimated Benefits and Costs: Extended

Government and Participants Savings

Benefit to Cost Ratios for 3 Measures of Participation

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

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

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%.

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

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

Percentage of Total Indirect Effect of Preschool Accounted for by Mediators

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.

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 success in A. Coordinating services B. Recruiting and keeping well-trained staff C. Tailoring services to the needs of families.

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/