This paper quantifies the experimentally evaluated life-cycle benefits of a widely implemented early childhood program targeting disadvantaged families. We join experimental data with nonexperimental data using economic models to forecast its life-cycle benefits. Our baseline estimate of the internal rate of return (benefit/cost ratio) is 13.7% (7.3). We conduct extensive sensitivity analyses to account for model estimation error, forecasting error, and judgments made about the empirical magnitudes of non-market benefits. We examine the performance of widely used, ad hoc estimates of long-term benefit/cost ratios based on short-term measures of childhood test scores and find them wanting.

No abstract

The Levels of Emotional Awareness Scale (LEAS; Lane, Quinlan, Schwartz, Walker, & Zeitlan, 1990) is the most commonly used measure of differentiation and complexity in the use of emotion words and is associated with important clinical outcomes. Hand scoring the LEAS is time consuming. Existing programs for scoring open-ended responses cannot mimic LEAS hand scoring. Therefore, Leaf and Barchard (2006) developed the Program for Open-Ended Scoring (POES) to score the LEAS. In this article, we report a study in which the reliability and validity of POES scoring were examined. In the study, we used three participant types (adult community members, university students, children), three LEAS versions (paper based, computer based, and the LEAS for children), and a diverse set of criterion variables. Across this variety of conditions, the four POES scoring methods had internal consistencies and validities that were comparable to hand scoring, indicating that POES scoring can be used in clinical practice and other applied settings in which hand scoring is impractical.

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may The Life-cycle Benefits of an Influential Early Childhood Program December 2016Any opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author(s) and not those of IZA. Research published in this series may include views on policy, but IZA takes no institutional policy positions. The IZA research network is committed to the IZA Guiding Principles of Research Integrity. The IZA Institute of Labor Economics is an independent economic research institute that conducts research in labor economics and offers evidence-based policy advice on labor market issues. Supported by the Deutsche Post Foundation, IZA runs the world's largest network of economists, whose research aims to provide answers to the global labor market challenges of our time. Our key objective is to build bridges between academic research, policymakers and society. IZA Discussion Papers often represent preliminary work and are circulated to encourage discussion. Citation of such a paper should account for its provisional character. A revised version may be available directly from the author. Heckman et al., 2010a,b), the Carolina Abecedarian Project (ABC) and the Carolina Approach to Responsive Education (CARE) (Ramey et al., 2000(Ramey et al., , 2012, and the Infant Health and Development Program (IHDP) (Gross et al., 1997;Duncan and Sojourner, 2013). IHDP was inspired by ABC/CARE (Gross et al., 1997).3 See, e.g., Kline and Walters (2016) and Weiland and Yoshikawa (2013). 4 Throughout this paper, we refer to health-related quality of life as quality of life. It is 1 increased parental labor income arising from subsidized childcare. 5Evidence from these programs is relevant for contemporary policy discussions because their main components are present in a variety of current interventions.6 About 19% of all African-American children are eligible for these programs today. 7Analyzing the benefits of programs with a diverse array of outcomes across multiple domains and periods of life is both challenging and rewarding. Doing so highlights the numerous ways through which early childhood programs enhance adult capabilities. We use a variety of measures to characterize program benefits. Instead of reporting only individual treatment effects or categories of treatment effects, our benefit/cost analyses account for all measured aspects of these programs, including the welfare costs of taxes to publicly finance them.We display the sensitivity of our estimates exclud...

No abstract

No abstract

This paper monetizes the life-cycle intragenerational and intergenerational benefits of the Perry Preschool Project, a pioneering high-quality early childhood education program implemented before Head Start that targeted disadvantaged African-Americans and was evaluated by a randomized trial. It has the longest follow-up of any experimentally evaluated early childhood education program. We follow participants into late midlife as well as their children into adulthood. Impacts on the original participants and their children generate substantial benefits. Access to life-cycle data enables us to evaluate the accuracy of widely used schemes to forecast life-cycle benefits from early-life test scores, which we find wanting.

The Future Elderly Model (FEM) is a microsimulation model designed to forecast health status, longevity, and a variety of economic outcomes. Compared to traditional actuarial models, microsimulation models provide greater opportunities for policy forecasting and richer detail, but they typically build upon smaller samples of data that may mitigate forecasting accuracy. We perform validation analyses of the FEM's mortality and quality of life forecasts using a version of the FEM estimated exclusively on early waves of data from the Health and Retirement Study. First, we compare FEM mortality and longevity projections to the actual mortality and longevity experience observed over the same period of time. We also compare the FEM results to actuarial forecasts of mortality and longevity during the same time. We find that FEM projections are generally in line with observed mortality rates and closely match longevity. Then, we assess the FEM's performance at predicting quality of life and longitudinal outcomes, two features missing from traditional actuarial models. Our analysis suggests the FEM performs at least as well as actuarial forecasts of mortality, while providing policy simulation features that are not available in actuarial models.