Interpreting Cost Benefit Analysis
Key variables within the study and analysis Summary
The article addresses cost benefits evaluation variables in relation to the Juvenile Breaking Cycle Initiatives (Cowell, Lattimore & Krebs, 2010). These programs are mainly objected at managing and controlling treatment and welfare services among minors and young individuals with high possibilities of drugs abuse or re-offense. The study was, therefore, aimed at improving the current regulations and rehabilitation procedures for drugs abuse in relation to the juvenile offenders based on the fact that the population is associated with re-occurring social issues that necessitate firm and expanded initiatives. The existing cost variables in the study was established to be high (Cowell, Lattimore & Krebs, 2010). As anticipated by most administrations the expenses reduction cannot balance further controls as well as treatments of the populace (Cowell, Lattimore & Krebs, 2010). In addition, the investigation included several demographic based variables in regard to the juvenile wrongdoers like race, gender, and age. Based on the study the primary variables that were included are cognitive health issues diagnosis, substance abuse history, treatment and counseling, potential abuse risk and previous association with the juvenile system.
Continue or Discontinue the Program, Based On the Evidence Provided In the Analysis, and Why
Despite the fact that the analysis proved that the administrators should not anticipate for any balancing of the expenses directly I would continue with the program. This is because the existing proof proposes that no cost balance would be acquired directly but the Juvenile justice expenses might ultimately be equal to the normal expenses. It is apparent that close to every organization is focusing on programs that are aimed at lowering its operating expenses to create more economic advantages. Continuing the program would not automatically create the anticipated cost balance but it would eventually lead to lesser operation expenses (Cowell, Lattimore & Krebs, 2010). In that, with time the number of recidivism within the system would lower as well as substance abuse risks which imply that fewer materials will be required. This would generate costs reduction in general while still creating behavioral changes among those that are involved and the community in general.
Potential Consequences of Your Decision for the Affected Community
The result of the program indicated that the juvenile respondents within the program are less vulnerable to re-offenses when equated with those outside the program. In addition, the initiative was graded as an effective one because it proved its economic and cost benefits (Cowell, Lattimore & Krebs, 2010). In this case, my decision to retain the program would impact the touched community positively by creating social reforms and saving Juvenile justice based expenses. This is because when the program is supported to continue it implies that those incorporated in the program will be transformed in regard to behaviors and perception thus leading to fewer cases of re-offenses (Cowell, Lattimore & Krebs, 2010). In addition, the program would seek to lower the chances of substance abuse among minors by rehabilitating and seeking to monitor every individual behavior. This would, therefore, imply that the community would require fewer resources in supporting the program which can thus be categorized as an economic benefit. The best way to create change is playing part in creating it and in this case given that juveniles are vulnerable to retaliation and behavioral change the decision to retain the program would eventually create economic and cost benefits balance by reducing the associated expenses and creating more free revenue for economic growth.
References
Cowell, A., Lattimore, P., & Krebs, C. (2010). A Cost-Benefit Study of a Breaking the Cycle Program for Juveniles. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 47(2), 241-262
