Age 21 cost-benefit analysis of the Title I Chicago child-parent centers

This study presents a cost benefit analysis of a federally funded comprehensive early care and education program in Chicago. The Chicago Parent-Child program (CPC), run through the public school system, serves children ages three through nine in many of Chicago?s most disadvantaged neighborhoods. The study used data from the 1980 birth cohort in the Chicago Longitudinal Study, which includes all the participants from the CPC program as well as a group of demographically similar children who did not participate in the program. Using a quasi-experimental research design, with a comparison group of non-participants, the study tracked children from age three through the year 2000 when the children had reached approximately 21 (mean age of 20.3). The sample in 2000 included 1,286 children, 83.6% of the original sample. Program effects, including educational attainment, school achievement, family support, child maltreatment, juvenile crime, and involvement in special education services, were measured across three levels of program participation: preschool participation, school-age participation, and extended program participation (4-6 years versus 1-3 years). These findings were then used to generate benefit estimates in five areas: government expenditures for special education services, government expenditures in the criminal justice system, government expenditures in the child welfare system, tangible expenditures for crime victims, and earnings capacity and tax revenues. The study found that program participation, particularly preschool and extended participation led to an overall benefit to society, including reductions in expenditures in each category and an increase in individuals? lifetime earnings capacity. They estimated a $7.00 total benefit for every public dollar invested, although the benefits were greater for boys than girls. The authors note two limitations to the study. The benefit estimates are based on projections rather than measured effects and the study does not measure several potential benefit outcomes such as reduced health and welfare expenditures.