A snapshot of the long-term impacts of universal pre-k in Oregon

Posted on by David Evans

If the United States were to invest in a public, voluntary, high-quality universal prekindergarten program starting in 2016 and fully phased in by 2017, what would the long-term impacts be for ? Our study looks to quantify the long-term benefits and costs of investing in a high-quality universal prekindergarten program available to all 3- and 4-year-olds across the United States. Use the data and interactives below to explore how a universal prekindergarten program would affect .

Who would participate?

Currently, in , percent of 3- and 4-year-olds ( children) participate in state-sponsored prekindergarten. Unfortunately, the quality of these programs varies significantly, which means that preschoolers do not always experience the same benefits or long-term effects. If a universal prekindergarten program were enacted in 2016 and fully phased in by 2017, percent of 3- and 4-year-olds ( children) would be enrolled in public prekindergarten, benefiting from a high-quality early childhood education.

What are the benefits of a universal prekindergarten program?

High-quality prekindergarten education can generate significant long-run benefits for participating children, their families, and even other non-participants. Longitudinal studies have shown, for example, that aside from improved educational achievement, children who have attended a prekindergarten program have spent less time in special education and had lower grade retention rates. These children also experience less child maltreatment and reduced crime, smoking, and depression rates over the course of their lives. In addition, both participating children and their parents have higher projected earnings, which subsequently increases government tax revenue.

If a universal prekindergarten program were to start in the United States in 2016, would see more than $ million in total benefits in 2050, amounting to savings of $ per capita that year. Here’s how these total benefits break down:

  • $ per person is attributed to savings to government.
  • $ per person comes from increased compensation.
  • The remaining $ per person is accounted for by savings to each individual from better health and less crime.

What are the costs?

Currently, spends $ per capita per year on preschool programs, special education services, and Head Start. In 2017, when a universal prekindergarten program is fully phased in, it would take an investment of $ more per capita per year to maintain a high-quality prekindergarten program.

There are three main costs associated with a high-quality universal prekindergarten program: the cost of the program, increased high school attendance, and increased college attendance. The program itself is based on Chicago’s comprehensive high-quality Child-Parent Center half-day program, so the costs take into account the multitude of services that are provided at the Child-Parent Center offset by the current spending on similar early childhood education programs as to not double-count expenditures. Because studies have shown that students who attend prekindergarten have higher high school completion rates and are more likely to attend college, these usage costs are also factored into the total cost of a universal prekindergarten program.

In 2050, these costs add up to an additional $ million, or $ per capita in . $ per capita is attributed to program costs, $ comes from increased high school usage per person, and the remaining $ per person is accounted for by increased college attendance.

How do the benefits compare to the costs?

If a high-quality universal prekindergarten program were to start in the United States in 2016 and be fully phased in by the end of 2017, the program would require a total of $ million in taxpayer dollars. Over time, the cost would eventually grow to include the cost of additional high school and college attendance. And by 2050, there would be more than $ million in total benefits compared to merely $ million in total costs, yielding net benefits of $ million. By 2050, for every dollar invested in a universal program, there would be $ in returns.

To see the national numbers, return to the full report.

A snapshot of the long-term impacts of universal pre-k in Connecticut

Posted on by Austin Clemens

If the United States were to invest in a public, voluntary, high-quality universal prekindergarten program starting in 2016 and fully phased in by 2017, what would the long-term impacts be for ? Our study looks to quantify the long-term benefits and costs of investing in a high-quality universal prekindergarten program available to all 3- and 4-year-olds across the United States. Use the data and interactives below to explore how a universal prekindergarten program would affect .

Who would participate?

Currently, in , percent of 3- and 4-year-olds ( children) participate in state-sponsored prekindergarten. Unfortunately, the quality of these programs varies significantly, which means that preschoolers do not always experience the same benefits or long-term effects. If a universal prekindergarten program were enacted in 2016 and fully phased in by 2017, percent of 3- and 4-year-olds ( children) would be enrolled in public prekindergarten, benefiting from a high-quality early childhood education.

What are the benefits of a universal prekindergarten program?

High-quality prekindergarten education can generate significant long-run benefits for participating children, their families, and even other non-participants. Longitudinal studies have shown, for example, that aside from improved educational achievement, children who have attended a prekindergarten program have spent less time in special education and had lower grade retention rates. These children also experience less child maltreatment and reduced crime, smoking, and depression rates over the course of their lives. In addition, both participating children and their parents have higher projected earnings, which subsequently increases government tax revenue.

If a universal prekindergarten program were to start in the United States in 2016, would see more than $ million in total benefits in 2050, amounting to savings of $ per capita that year. Here’s how these total benefits break down:

  • $ per person is attributed to savings to government.
  • $ per person comes from increased compensation.
  • The remaining $ per person is accounted for by savings to each individual from better health and less crime.

What are the costs?

Currently, spends $ per capita per year on preschool programs, special education services, and Head Start. In 2017, when a universal prekindergarten program is fully phased in, it would take an investment of $ more per capita per year to maintain a high-quality prekindergarten program.

There are three main costs associated with a high-quality universal prekindergarten program: the cost of the program, increased high school attendance, and increased college attendance. The program itself is based on Chicago’s comprehensive high-quality Child-Parent Center half-day program, so the costs take into account the multitude of services that are provided at the Child-Parent Center offset by the current spending on similar early childhood education programs as to not double-count expenditures. Because studies have shown that students who attend prekindergarten have higher high school completion rates and are more likely to attend college, these usage costs are also factored into the total cost of a universal prekindergarten program.

In 2050, these costs add up to an additional $ million, or $ per capita in . $ per capita is attributed to program costs, $ comes from increased high school usage per person, and the remaining $ per person is accounted for by increased college attendance.

How do the benefits compare to the costs?

If a high-quality universal prekindergarten program were to start in the United States in 2016 and be fully phased in by the end of 2017, the program would require a total of $ million in taxpayer dollars. Over time, the cost would eventually grow to include the cost of additional high school and college attendance. And by 2050, there would be more than $ million in total benefits compared to merely $ million in total costs, yielding net benefits of $ million. By 2050, for every dollar invested in a universal program, there would be $ in returns.

To see the national numbers, return to the full report.

A snapshot of the long-term impacts of universal pre-k in Illinois

Posted on by Austin Clemens

If the United States were to invest in a public, voluntary, high-quality universal prekindergarten program starting in 2016 and fully phased in by 2017, what would the long-term impacts be for ? Our study looks to quantify the long-term benefits and costs of investing in a high-quality universal prekindergarten program available to all 3- and 4-year-olds across the United States. Use the data and interactives below to explore how a universal prekindergarten program would affect .

Who would participate?

Currently, in , percent of 3- and 4-year-olds ( children) participate in state-sponsored prekindergarten. Unfortunately, the quality of these programs varies significantly, which means that preschoolers do not always experience the same benefits or long-term effects. If a universal prekindergarten program were enacted in 2016 and fully phased in by 2017, percent of 3- and 4-year-olds ( children) would be enrolled in public prekindergarten, benefiting from a high-quality early childhood education.

What are the benefits of a universal prekindergarten program?

High-quality prekindergarten education can generate significant long-run benefits for participating children, their families, and even other non-participants. Longitudinal studies have shown, for example, that aside from improved educational achievement, children who have attended a prekindergarten program have spent less time in special education and had lower grade retention rates. These children also experience less child maltreatment and reduced crime, smoking, and depression rates over the course of their lives. In addition, both participating children and their parents have higher projected earnings, which subsequently increases government tax revenue.

If a universal prekindergarten program were to start in the United States in 2016, would see more than $ million in total benefits in 2050, amounting to savings of $ per capita that year. Here’s how these total benefits break down:

  • $ per person is attributed to savings to government.
  • $ per person comes from increased compensation.
  • The remaining $ per person is accounted for by savings to each individual from better health and less crime.

What are the costs?

Currently, spends $ per capita per year on preschool programs, special education services, and Head Start. In 2017, when a universal prekindergarten program is fully phased in, it would take an investment of $ more per capita per year to maintain a high-quality prekindergarten program.

There are three main costs associated with a high-quality universal prekindergarten program: the cost of the program, increased high school attendance, and increased college attendance. The program itself is based on Chicago’s comprehensive high-quality Child-Parent Center half-day program, so the costs take into account the multitude of services that are provided at the Child-Parent Center offset by the current spending on similar early childhood education programs as to not double-count expenditures. Because studies have shown that students who attend prekindergarten have higher high school completion rates and are more likely to attend college, these usage costs are also factored into the total cost of a universal prekindergarten program.

In 2050, these costs add up to an additional $ million, or $ per capita in . $ per capita is attributed to program costs, $ comes from increased high school usage per person, and the remaining $ per person is accounted for by increased college attendance.

How do the benefits compare to the costs?

If a high-quality universal prekindergarten program were to start in the United States in 2016 and be fully phased in by the end of 2017, the program would require a total of $ million in taxpayer dollars. Over time, the cost would eventually grow to include the cost of additional high school and college attendance. And by 2050, there would be more than $ million in total benefits compared to merely $ million in total costs, yielding net benefits of $ million. By 2050, for every dollar invested in a universal program, there would be $ in returns.

To see the national numbers, return to the full report.

A snapshot of the long-term impacts of universal pre-k in Maryland

Posted on by Austin Clemens

If the United States were to invest in a public, voluntary, high-quality universal prekindergarten program starting in 2016 and fully phased in by 2017, what would the long-term impacts be for ? Our study looks to quantify the long-term benefits and costs of investing in a high-quality universal prekindergarten program available to all 3- and 4-year-olds across the United States. Use the data and interactives below to explore how a universal prekindergarten program would affect .

Who would participate?

Currently, in , percent of 3- and 4-year-olds ( children) participate in state-sponsored prekindergarten. Unfortunately, the quality of these programs varies significantly, which means that preschoolers do not always experience the same benefits or long-term effects. If a universal prekindergarten program were enacted in 2016 and fully phased in by 2017, percent of 3- and 4-year-olds ( children) would be enrolled in public prekindergarten, benefiting from a high-quality early childhood education.

What are the benefits of a universal prekindergarten program?

High-quality prekindergarten education can generate significant long-run benefits for participating children, their families, and even other non-participants. Longitudinal studies have shown, for example, that aside from improved educational achievement, children who have attended a prekindergarten program have spent less time in special education and had lower grade retention rates. These children also experience less child maltreatment and reduced crime, smoking, and depression rates over the course of their lives. In addition, both participating children and their parents have higher projected earnings, which subsequently increases government tax revenue.

If a universal prekindergarten program were to start in the United States in 2016, would see more than $ million in total benefits in 2050, amounting to savings of $ per capita that year. Here’s how these total benefits break down:

  • $ per person is attributed to savings to government.
  • $ per person comes from increased compensation.
  • The remaining $ per person is accounted for by savings to each individual from better health and less crime.

What are the costs?

Currently, spends $ per capita per year on preschool programs, special education services, and Head Start. In 2017, when a universal prekindergarten program is fully phased in, it would take an investment of $ more per capita per year to maintain a high-quality prekindergarten program.

There are three main costs associated with a high-quality universal prekindergarten program: the cost of the program, increased high school attendance, and increased college attendance. The program itself is based on Chicago’s comprehensive high-quality Child-Parent Center half-day program, so the costs take into account the multitude of services that are provided at the Child-Parent Center offset by the current spending on similar early childhood education programs as to not double-count expenditures. Because studies have shown that students who attend prekindergarten have higher high school completion rates and are more likely to attend college, these usage costs are also factored into the total cost of a universal prekindergarten program.

In 2050, these costs add up to an additional $ million, or $ per capita in . $ per capita is attributed to program costs, $ comes from increased high school usage per person, and the remaining $ per person is accounted for by increased college attendance.

How do the benefits compare to the costs?

If a high-quality universal prekindergarten program were to start in the United States in 2016 and be fully phased in by the end of 2017, the program would require a total of $ million in taxpayer dollars. Over time, the cost would eventually grow to include the cost of additional high school and college attendance. And by 2050, there would be more than $ million in total benefits compared to merely $ million in total costs, yielding net benefits of $ million. By 2050, for every dollar invested in a universal program, there would be $ in returns.

To see the national numbers, return to the full report.

A snapshot of the long-term impacts of universal pre-k in Texas

Posted on by David Evans

If the United States were to invest in a public, voluntary, high-quality universal prekindergarten program starting in 2016 and fully phased in by 2017, what would the long-term impacts be for ? Our study looks to quantify the long-term benefits and costs of investing in a high-quality universal prekindergarten program available to all 3- and 4-year-olds across the United States. Use the data and interactives below to explore how a universal prekindergarten program would affect .

Who would participate?

Currently, in , percent of 3- and 4-year-olds ( children) participate in state-sponsored prekindergarten. Unfortunately, the quality of these programs varies significantly, which means that preschoolers do not always experience the same benefits or long-term effects. If a universal prekindergarten program were enacted in 2016 and fully phased in by 2017, percent of 3- and 4-year-olds ( children) would be enrolled in public prekindergarten, benefiting from a high-quality early childhood education.

What are the benefits of a universal prekindergarten program?

High-quality prekindergarten education can generate significant long-run benefits for participating children, their families, and even other non-participants. Longitudinal studies have shown, for example, that aside from improved educational achievement, children who have attended a prekindergarten program have spent less time in special education and had lower grade retention rates. These children also experience less child maltreatment and reduced crime, smoking, and depression rates over the course of their lives. In addition, both participating children and their parents have higher projected earnings, which subsequently increases government tax revenue.

If a universal prekindergarten program were to start in the United States in 2016, would see more than $ million in total benefits in 2050, amounting to savings of $ per capita that year. Here’s how these total benefits break down:

  • $ per person is attributed to savings to government.
  • $ per person comes from increased compensation.
  • The remaining $ per person is accounted for by savings to each individual from better health and less crime.

What are the costs?

Currently, spends $ per capita per year on preschool programs, special education services, and Head Start. In 2017, when a universal prekindergarten program is fully phased in, it would take an investment of $ more per capita per year to maintain a high-quality prekindergarten program.

There are three main costs associated with a high-quality universal prekindergarten program: the cost of the program, increased high school attendance, and increased college attendance. The program itself is based on Chicago’s comprehensive high-quality Child-Parent Center half-day program, so the costs take into account the multitude of services that are provided at the Child-Parent Center offset by the current spending on similar early childhood education programs as to not double-count expenditures. Because studies have shown that students who attend prekindergarten have higher high school completion rates and are more likely to attend college, these usage costs are also factored into the total cost of a universal prekindergarten program.

In 2050, these costs add up to an additional $ million, or $ per capita in . $ per capita is attributed to program costs, $ comes from increased high school usage per person, and the remaining $ per person is accounted for by increased college attendance.

How do the benefits compare to the costs?

If a high-quality universal prekindergarten program were to start in the United States in 2016 and be fully phased in by the end of 2017, the program would require a total of $ million in taxpayer dollars. Over time, the cost would eventually grow to include the cost of additional high school and college attendance. And by 2050, there would be more than $ million in total benefits compared to merely $ million in total costs, yielding net benefits of $ million. By 2050, for every dollar invested in a universal program, there would be $ in returns.

To see the national numbers, return to the full report.

A snapshot of the long-term impacts of universal pre-k in Wyoming

Posted on by David Evans

If the United States were to invest in a public, voluntary, high-quality universal prekindergarten program starting in 2016 and fully phased in by 2017, what would the long-term impacts be for ? Our study looks to quantify the long-term benefits and costs of investing in a high-quality universal prekindergarten program available to all 3- and 4-year-olds across the United States. Use the data and interactives below to explore how a universal prekindergarten program would affect .

Who would participate?

Currently, in , percent of 3- and 4-year-olds ( children) participate in state-sponsored prekindergarten. Unfortunately, the quality of these programs varies significantly, which means that preschoolers do not always experience the same benefits or long-term effects. If a universal prekindergarten program were enacted in 2016 and fully phased in by 2017, percent of 3- and 4-year-olds ( children) would be enrolled in public prekindergarten, benefiting from a high-quality early childhood education.

What are the benefits of a universal prekindergarten program?

High-quality prekindergarten education can generate significant long-run benefits for participating children, their families, and even other non-participants. Longitudinal studies have shown, for example, that aside from improved educational achievement, children who have attended a prekindergarten program have spent less time in special education and had lower grade retention rates. These children also experience less child maltreatment and reduced crime, smoking, and depression rates over the course of their lives. In addition, both participating children and their parents have higher projected earnings, which subsequently increases government tax revenue.

If a universal prekindergarten program were to start in the United States in 2016, would see more than $ million in total benefits in 2050, amounting to savings of $ per capita that year. Here’s how these total benefits break down:

  • $ per person is attributed to savings to government.
  • $ per person comes from increased compensation.
  • The remaining $ per person is accounted for by savings to each individual from better health and less crime.

What are the costs?

Currently, spends $ per capita per year on preschool programs, special education services, and Head Start. In 2017, when a universal prekindergarten program is fully phased in, it would take an investment of $ more per capita per year to maintain a high-quality prekindergarten program.

There are three main costs associated with a high-quality universal prekindergarten program: the cost of the program, increased high school attendance, and increased college attendance. The program itself is based on Chicago’s comprehensive high-quality Child-Parent Center half-day program, so the costs take into account the multitude of services that are provided at the Child-Parent Center offset by the current spending on similar early childhood education programs as to not double-count expenditures. Because studies have shown that students who attend prekindergarten have higher high school completion rates and are more likely to attend college, these usage costs are also factored into the total cost of a universal prekindergarten program.

In 2050, these costs add up to an additional $ million, or $ per capita in . $ per capita is attributed to program costs, $ comes from increased high school usage per person, and the remaining $ per person is accounted for by increased college attendance.

How do the benefits compare to the costs?

If a high-quality universal prekindergarten program were to start in the United States in 2016 and be fully phased in by the end of 2017, the program would require a total of $ million in taxpayer dollars. Over time, the cost would eventually grow to include the cost of additional high school and college attendance. And by 2050, there would be more than $ million in total benefits compared to merely $ million in total costs, yielding net benefits of $ million. By 2050, for every dollar invested in a universal program, there would be $ in returns.

To see the national numbers, return to the full report.

A snapshot of the long-term impacts of universal pre-k in New Jersey

Posted on by Austin Clemens

If the United States were to invest in a public, voluntary, high-quality universal prekindergarten program starting in 2016 and fully phased in by 2017, what would the long-term impacts be for ? Our study looks to quantify the long-term benefits and costs of investing in a high-quality universal prekindergarten program available to all 3- and 4-year-olds across the United States. Use the data and interactives below to explore how a universal prekindergarten program would affect .

Who would participate?

Currently, in , percent of 3- and 4-year-olds ( children) participate in state-sponsored prekindergarten. Unfortunately, the quality of these programs varies significantly, which means that preschoolers do not always experience the same benefits or long-term effects. If a universal prekindergarten program were enacted in 2016 and fully phased in by 2017, percent of 3- and 4-year-olds ( children) would be enrolled in public prekindergarten, benefiting from a high-quality early childhood education.

What are the benefits of a universal prekindergarten program?

High-quality prekindergarten education can generate significant long-run benefits for participating children, their families, and even other non-participants. Longitudinal studies have shown, for example, that aside from improved educational achievement, children who have attended a prekindergarten program have spent less time in special education and had lower grade retention rates. These children also experience less child maltreatment and reduced crime, smoking, and depression rates over the course of their lives. In addition, both participating children and their parents have higher projected earnings, which subsequently increases government tax revenue.

If a universal prekindergarten program were to start in the United States in 2016, would see more than $ million in total benefits in 2050, amounting to savings of $ per capita that year. Here’s how these total benefits break down:

  • $ per person is attributed to savings to government.
  • $ per person comes from increased compensation.
  • The remaining $ per person is accounted for by savings to each individual from better health and less crime.

What are the costs?

Currently, spends $ per capita per year on preschool programs, special education services, and Head Start. In 2017, when a universal prekindergarten program is fully phased in, it would take an investment of $ more per capita per year to maintain a high-quality prekindergarten program.

There are three main costs associated with a high-quality universal prekindergarten program: the cost of the program, increased high school attendance, and increased college attendance. The program itself is based on Chicago’s comprehensive high-quality Child-Parent Center half-day program, so the costs take into account the multitude of services that are provided at the Child-Parent Center offset by the current spending on similar early childhood education programs as to not double-count expenditures. Because studies have shown that students who attend prekindergarten have higher high school completion rates and are more likely to attend college, these usage costs are also factored into the total cost of a universal prekindergarten program.

In 2050, these costs add up to an additional $ million, or $ per capita in . $ per capita is attributed to program costs, $ comes from increased high school usage per person, and the remaining $ per person is accounted for by increased college attendance.

How do the benefits compare to the costs?

If a high-quality universal prekindergarten program were to start in the United States in 2016 and be fully phased in by the end of 2017, the program would require a total of $ million in taxpayer dollars. Over time, the cost would eventually grow to include the cost of additional high school and college attendance. And by 2050, there would be more than $ million in total benefits compared to merely $ million in total costs, yielding net benefits of $ million. By 2050, for every dollar invested in a universal program, there would be $ in returns.

To see the national numbers, return to the full report.

A snapshot of the long-term impacts of universal pre-k in North Dakota

Posted on by Austin Clemens

If the United States were to invest in a public, voluntary, high-quality universal prekindergarten program starting in 2016 and fully phased in by 2017, what would the long-term impacts be for ? Our study looks to quantify the long-term benefits and costs of investing in a high-quality universal prekindergarten program available to all 3- and 4-year-olds across the United States. Use the data and interactives below to explore how a universal prekindergarten program would affect .

Who would participate?

Currently, in , percent of 3- and 4-year-olds ( children) participate in state-sponsored prekindergarten. Unfortunately, the quality of these programs varies significantly, which means that preschoolers do not always experience the same benefits or long-term effects. If a universal prekindergarten program were enacted in 2016 and fully phased in by 2017, percent of 3- and 4-year-olds ( children) would be enrolled in public prekindergarten, benefiting from a high-quality early childhood education.

What are the benefits of a universal prekindergarten program?

High-quality prekindergarten education can generate significant long-run benefits for participating children, their families, and even other non-participants. Longitudinal studies have shown, for example, that aside from improved educational achievement, children who have attended a prekindergarten program have spent less time in special education and had lower grade retention rates. These children also experience less child maltreatment and reduced crime, smoking, and depression rates over the course of their lives. In addition, both participating children and their parents have higher projected earnings, which subsequently increases government tax revenue.

If a universal prekindergarten program were to start in the United States in 2016, would see more than $ million in total benefits in 2050, amounting to savings of $ per capita that year. Here’s how these total benefits break down:

  • $ per person is attributed to savings to government.
  • $ per person comes from increased compensation.
  • The remaining $ per person is accounted for by savings to each individual from better health and less crime.

What are the costs?

Currently, spends $ per capita per year on preschool programs, special education services, and Head Start. In 2017, when a universal prekindergarten program is fully phased in, it would take an investment of $ more per capita per year to maintain a high-quality prekindergarten program.

There are three main costs associated with a high-quality universal prekindergarten program: the cost of the program, increased high school attendance, and increased college attendance. The program itself is based on Chicago’s comprehensive high-quality Child-Parent Center half-day program, so the costs take into account the multitude of services that are provided at the Child-Parent Center offset by the current spending on similar early childhood education programs as to not double-count expenditures. Because studies have shown that students who attend prekindergarten have higher high school completion rates and are more likely to attend college, these usage costs are also factored into the total cost of a universal prekindergarten program.

In 2050, these costs add up to an additional $ million, or $ per capita in . $ per capita is attributed to program costs, $ comes from increased high school usage per person, and the remaining $ per person is accounted for by increased college attendance.

How do the benefits compare to the costs?

If a high-quality universal prekindergarten program were to start in the United States in 2016 and be fully phased in by the end of 2017, the program would require a total of $ million in taxpayer dollars. Over time, the cost would eventually grow to include the cost of additional high school and college attendance. And by 2050, there would be more than $ million in total benefits compared to merely $ million in total costs, yielding net benefits of $ million. By 2050, for every dollar invested in a universal program, there would be $ in returns.

To see the national numbers, return to the full report.

A snapshot of the long-term impacts of universal pre-k in Ohio

Posted on by Austin Clemens

If the United States were to invest in a public, voluntary, high-quality universal prekindergarten program starting in 2016 and fully phased in by 2017, what would the long-term impacts be for ? Our study looks to quantify the long-term benefits and costs of investing in a high-quality universal prekindergarten program available to all 3- and 4-year-olds across the United States. Use the data and interactives below to explore how a universal prekindergarten program would affect .

Who would participate?

Currently, in , percent of 3- and 4-year-olds ( children) participate in state-sponsored prekindergarten. Unfortunately, the quality of these programs varies significantly, which means that preschoolers do not always experience the same benefits or long-term effects. If a universal prekindergarten program were enacted in 2016 and fully phased in by 2017, percent of 3- and 4-year-olds ( children) would be enrolled in public prekindergarten, benefiting from a high-quality early childhood education.

What are the benefits of a universal prekindergarten program?

High-quality prekindergarten education can generate significant long-run benefits for participating children, their families, and even other non-participants. Longitudinal studies have shown, for example, that aside from improved educational achievement, children who have attended a prekindergarten program have spent less time in special education and had lower grade retention rates. These children also experience less child maltreatment and reduced crime, smoking, and depression rates over the course of their lives. In addition, both participating children and their parents have higher projected earnings, which subsequently increases government tax revenue.

If a universal prekindergarten program were to start in the United States in 2016, would see more than $ million in total benefits in 2050, amounting to savings of $ per capita that year. Here’s how these total benefits break down:

  • $ per person is attributed to savings to government.
  • $ per person comes from increased compensation.
  • The remaining $ per person is accounted for by savings to each individual from better health and less crime.

What are the costs?

Currently, spends $ per capita per year on preschool programs, special education services, and Head Start. In 2017, when a universal prekindergarten program is fully phased in, it would take an investment of $ more per capita per year to maintain a high-quality prekindergarten program.

There are three main costs associated with a high-quality universal prekindergarten program: the cost of the program, increased high school attendance, and increased college attendance. The program itself is based on Chicago’s comprehensive high-quality Child-Parent Center half-day program, so the costs take into account the multitude of services that are provided at the Child-Parent Center offset by the current spending on similar early childhood education programs as to not double-count expenditures. Because studies have shown that students who attend prekindergarten have higher high school completion rates and are more likely to attend college, these usage costs are also factored into the total cost of a universal prekindergarten program.

In 2050, these costs add up to an additional $ million, or $ per capita in . $ per capita is attributed to program costs, $ comes from increased high school usage per person, and the remaining $ per person is accounted for by increased college attendance.

How do the benefits compare to the costs?

If a high-quality universal prekindergarten program were to start in the United States in 2016 and be fully phased in by the end of 2017, the program would require a total of $ million in taxpayer dollars. Over time, the cost would eventually grow to include the cost of additional high school and college attendance. And by 2050, there would be more than $ million in total benefits compared to merely $ million in total costs, yielding net benefits of $ million. By 2050, for every dollar invested in a universal program, there would be $ in returns.

To see the national numbers, return to the full report.

Must-Read: Jan Mohlmann and Wim Suyker: Blanchard and Leigh’s Fiscal Multipliers Revisited

Posted on by Brad DeLong

Must-Read: Naughty, naughty!

Jan Mohlmann and Wim Suyker: Blanchard and Leigh’s Fiscal Multipliers Revisited: “[We] do not find convincing evidence for stronger-than-expected fiscal multipliers for EU countries…

…during the sovereign debt crisis (2012-2013) or during the tepid recovery thereafter…. As Blanchard and Leigh did, we find a negative and statistically significant coefficient for 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 but not for 2011-2012…. For 2012-2013 we find a larger estimate than Blanchard and Leigh, but due to the higher standard error the estimated coefficient is no longer significant at the 5% level…. In the two periods we added, our estimated coefficients are close to zero…. As Blanchard and Leigh did, we find a statistically significant negative coefficient in the panel forecast for 2009-2013. This result holds for the prolonged period 2009-2015. However, we do not find a statistically significant coefficient when we perform the panel analysis for the period 2011-2015.

Nowhere in their piece do Mohlmann and Suyker report their estimated coefficient and its standard error for the entire period 2009-2015.

Repeat: nowhere in their piece do they report estimates for their entire sample.

Trying to back out estimates from the information they do give, if they had reported it they would have reported a number like -0.60 with a standard error near 0.23. Compare that to the Blanchard-Leigh estimates for 2009-2013 of a number of -0.67 with a standard error of 0.16.

See that a good and true lead is not “[There is no] convincing evidence for stronger-than-expected fiscal multipliers… during… 2012-13 or thereafter…”

See that a good and true lead would be: “There is no statistical power at all over 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2014-15 to test whether excess fiscal multipliers in those years are different than the strong excess fiscal multipliers found by Blanchard and Leigh…”

Seizing the high ground of the null hypothesis for one’s favored position, and then running tests with no power, is undignified…

Blanchard leigh Google Search