The Harvard Family Research Project separated from the Harvard Graduate School of Education to become the Global Family Research Project as of January 1, 2017. It is no longer affiliated with Harvard University.
A Profile of the Research Study of Cost of Quality Out-of-School Time Programs
Profile Information
- Full Text (HTML)
- How to cite
- About the OST Database
Research Description
| Overview and Components | The Cost of Quality Out-of-School Time Programs Study assesses characteristics of various types of out-of-school time (OST) programs, their requirements, and their associated costs. The study includes OST programs across six cities: Boston, Massachusetts; Charlotte, North Carolina; Chicago, Illinois; Denver, Colorado; New York, New York; and Seattle, Washington. |
| Start Date | 2006 |
| Scope | national |
| Type | afterschool, weekend, summer/vacation |
| Location | urban |
| Setting | public school, community-based organization |
| Participants | elementary through high school students |
| Number of Sites/Grantees | 111 programs across 6 cities, including 70 school-year programs targeting elementary and middle school students (younger children), 41 school- year programs targeting middle and high school students (teens), 45 summer programs targeting younger children, and 26 summer programs targeting teens (categories are not mutually exclusive: some programs fall into multiple categories). |
| Number Served | Programs targeting younger children served an average of 107 children each day during the school year and 93 during the summer. Teens programs served an average of 70 teens each day during the school year and 55 during the summer. |
| Study Details | This study focuses on the costs associated with operating mature, high-capacity school-based and community organization-based OST programs. |
| Funding Level | Not available |
| Funding Sources | The Wallace Foundation |
| Other | The study included an online calculator for assessing the costs of a variety of options for high-quality OST programs: http://www.wallacefoundation.org/cost-of-quality/cost-calculator/Pages/cost-calculator.aspx. |
| Researchers | Public/Private Ventures and The Finance Project |
| Research Profiled |
The Cost of Quality Out-of-School Time Programs Investments in Building Citywide Out-of-School Time Systems |
| Research Planned | None |
| Report Availability | Lind, C., Relave, N., Deich, S., Grossman, J., & Gersick, A. (2006). The costs of out-of-school-time programs: A review of the available evidence. Philadelphia & Washington, DC: Public/Private Ventures & The Finance Project. Available at: www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/after-school/quality-and-cost/Pages/Costs-of-Out-of-School-Time-Programs.aspx and at www.financeproject.org/publications/litreview.pdf Grossman, J. B., Lind, C., Hayes, C., McMaken, J., & Gersick, A. (2009). The cost of quality out-of-school time programs. Philadelphia & Washington, DC: Public/Private Ventures & The Finance Project. Available at: www.wallacefoundation.org/KnowledgeCenter/KnowledgeTopics/CurrentAreasofFocus/Out-Of-SchoolLearning/Pages/The-Cost-of-Quality-Out-of-School-Time-Programs.aspx and at www.financeproject.org/publications/CostofQualityOSTPrograms.pdf Hayes, C., Lind, C., Grossman, J. B., Stewart, N., Deich, S., Gersick, A., McMaken, J., & Campbell, M. (2009). Investments in building citywide out-of-school-time systems: A six-city study. Philadelphia & Washington, DC: Public/Private Ventures & The Finance Project. Available at: www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/after-school/coordinating-after-school-resources/Pages/Investments-in-Building-Citywide-Out-of-School-Time-Six-City-Study.aspx and at www.financeproject.org/publications/InvestmentsInBuildingOSTSystems.pdf |
Contacts
| Research |
Jean B. Grossman Cheryl D. Hayes |
|
| Profile Updated | April 4, 2012 | |
Research Study 2: Investments in Building Citywide Out-of-School-Time Systems: A Six City Study
Research Description
| Research Purpose | To explore strategies and activities pursued in building citywide OST systems, monetary and in-kind investments associated with these efforts, variations in investments from city to city, and options for financing these efforts. |
| Research Design | Non-Experimental: Researchers made site visits to each of the six cities to gather data on system investments in four major areas (providing community leadership and vision, improving program quality, expanding access and participation in quality programs, and financing and sustaining quality programs). These four areas were identified from the Finance Project and Public/Private Ventures’ prior research on afterschool systems. In planning for the site visits, the researchers worked closely with key informants, which included representatives from a variety of afterschool organizations and government agencies, to help identify the relevant system components in each city and the individuals and organizations most involved with and knowledgeable about these components. While on site, the researchers interviewed informants about funding and collected funding/budget documents. Follow-up phone interviews were also conducted with informants. |
| Data Collection Methods |
Document Review: Program budgets, annual reports, and documentation on the valuation of in-kind contributions were collected from programs. Interviews/Focus Groups: On-site interviews served to assess system-building activities, strategies, investments, and financing. Follow-up phone interviews served to verify data, probe for hidden costs (especially those related to in-kind contributions), and gather additional information as needed. |
| Data Collection Timeframe | Data were collected between October and December of 2007. |
Findings:
Formative/Process Findings
| Costs/Revenues |
The cities spent an average of 14% of their OST system-building investments on leadership, ranging from 1%–35% per city. The size of these investments seemed to be most closely related to the availability of funding from a third-party source, with larger percentages devoted to leadership investments in cities that had funding from third-party sources. On average, the cities devoted 43% of their OST system-building investments to improving program quality, ranging from 4%–69% per city. These investments consisted primarily of cash contributions and a small amount of in-kind donations. Out-of-pocket contributions largely covered staff members, consultants, facilities and equipment, materials development, and other direct costs. Investments in expanding access to and participation in OST programs averaged 38% of cities’ OST system-building investments, ranging from 3%–71% per city. An important determinant of the scale of access and participation investments seemed to be whether funding was allocated specifically for these investments—cities with more dedicated funding for this purpose had higher funding levels in this area. |
| Systemic Infrastructure |
Researchers identified five general strategies for nurturing OST system leadership:
Leadership investments were primarily directed toward governing bodies in Chicago and New York City, toward OST intermediaries in Charlotte and Seattle, and toward partnerships and collaborative relationships in Boston and Denver. Investments in leadership included the costs of leaders’ time incurred to participate in governing bodies, intermediaries, and other collaborative relationships. These costs varied depending on the participants and their role in the decision-making process. Leadership activities overseen by intermediary organizations were supported to a greater extent with dedicated staff time, while leadership activities that occurred in cities without intermediaries were supported more by time volunteered by leaders from several organizations. Investments in OST intermediaries were often provided by private foundations and public agencies interested in advancing system-building efforts.
Investments in quality improvements primarily consisted of ongoing training and technical assistance expenditures, which were typically funded with a blend of public and private resources. Cities offering staff credentialing or degree programs through existing training organizations had much larger professional development investments than cities that relied on consultants and outside trainers for professional development. Quality standards and data management systems also accounted for a substantial percentage of total investments in Denver and Chicago. Several cities were involved in developing program quality standards. Local leaders used lessons they learned from state initiatives and national professional organizations to help shape the design and implementation of quality-rating tools. Developing these tools did not appear to require substantial monetary investments, but researchers noted that they had little information on what was required to successfully implement quality standards. Three cities launched large-scale data management systems to collect participation and outcome data across local OST programs. Local leaders reported that foundation support was critical to covering the software development, training, system maintenance, and user support necessary to get these systems up and running. Investments in expanding access and participation were largely one-time allocations for start-up and development, which generally took one of five forms:
Four of the six cities heavily concentrated their expanding access and participation investments in particular strategies: Denver spent 100% of its investments on resource and referral systems, Boston and Charlotte spent 97%–100% on pilots and program innovations, and Seattle spent 100% on building facilities. By contrast, in New York City and Chicago, these investments were spread across multiple strategies. Expanding access and participation investments covered staff salaries and benefits, consultants, contracted services provided by communications and market research firms, printing, and administrative resources related to maintaining data systems and conducting data analysis. Researchers found little evidence of in-kind contributions in this area. |