Benefit Cost Analysis Of Social Programs. Child, Youth,

Research for Head Start has found many lasting benefits for learning and educational achievement for its attendees. Including school progress and educational attainment, social behavior, and reduction of delinquency and crime that is usually found within disadvantaged families. Head Start addresses all the guidelines within the Family Impact checklist on providing all adequate services to low income families. As mentioned above, under Family Support and Responsibilities, Head Start is a federally funded program, which also receives donations and grants. Therefore, the federal government must increase funding to the Head Start program so children from low-income families, get early education services to help them succeed in school. Since Head Start programs have minimal funding there are not enough spots available to include every child in need of the services provided by this program, especially within certain regions.

During October 2017, the Department of Youth Development organized the YouthWorks ML2 Program Evaluation Taskforce to oversee and design this comprehensive program evaluation to assess 2015-2016 impact of services provided by the YouthWorks ML2 Program (a youth development afterschool program in Harrisville, SC.); and this program evaluation was guided by seven key evaluation questions that relate to program effectiveness, efficiency, outcomes, and enrollment demographics as discussed within this report; and program findings revealed the following:

The overview of these three programs and attaining them is optimal, essentially a cycle of opportunity. By providing these services it develops a base for a long-term goal of achieving self-sufficiency and out of poverty. However, the accessibility of these beneficial resources may be difficult to obtain based on eligibility. New ideas that may help improve or reduce disparities in future programs can begin by concentrating on and expanding educational resources. For instance, a program that holds educational sessions on a monthly base, targeting communities, informing families of available resources and assisting with the application process. Another idea would be collaborating with the school system, specifically low-income based communities. After school program can be initiated to target parents that need assistance with extra resources and services. Lastly, innovating a classroom setting program for the duration of one-year, furthering educational and leadership ability for

The New Jersey State Department of Education received government, state, and local funding for youths ages 5-17, as part of the 21st Century Community Learning Centers Program. The question is; how can the states revise and disperse the amount of funding allocated for after-school programs for the current number of children enrolled? How can we raise awareness about the higher enrollment after-school programs offered for children of all ages? The current data shows the ratio of children enrolled versus the number of children not enrolled, offset the amount of dispersed funds, and varies state to state. The New Jersey Department of education allocates the funded money towards after-school programs housed at public schools with a high enrollment rate while other states do not. This leaves a huge gap in society with not enough funds creatively used towards youth programs. Children of all ages should have access to an after- school educational program and support from within their community. Common motivational goals set forth in the evaluation for this program are, for children to receive the enhancement of moral values, equality, and diversity through after-school educational programs within their local school districts. This evaluation is based on the logic model format and designed to meet the needs and demands assessment criteria. Weighing the outcome of an economical developed society in which graduation rates will increase. While, in past the government started

Pérez uses the underutilized data from the National Data Archive on Child Abuse and Neglect for his research studies on how child welfare policy decisions have impacted foster care youth. The archive serves as an information exchange of datasets and analysis for participants working on their research projects. Pérez and his colleague Dr. Richard J. Harris, a professor of sociology within the Department of Social Work, used this data for a manuscript (forthcoming) on the examination of the national independent living services provided under the Chafee Foster Care Independence Program under the Foster Care Independence Act of 1999. The John H. Chafee Foster Care Independence Program (CFCIP) offers assistance to help current and former foster care youths achieve self-sufficiency. “Despite the investment of $140 million/year since 1999 under the Foster Care Independence Act, only 1/3 of the national population of foster care youth receive the services promised under the Act, services including but not limited to education, housing, financial management, employment and emotional support,” said Pérez. Pérez and Harris, in their manuscript, address the factors that predict or shape this group’s service utilization. “While we know a lot, we still don’t know much,” said Dr. Pérez. “Historically we have been doing thing in an intuitive way but not in an evidence-based way,” added

Between the years 2002 and 2003, the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) was required to research Head Start’s influence on the children being impacted by the program. Lee used the Impact Study’s data for his research. With this data, Lee tried to answer two different questions; “What

The program that I choose to write about is a center base program. I choose this program because I am more familiar with this type of program. This program will take place in a school base setting. I think with a school base program it will benefit the parents because it will allow the parent to have adequate childcare services. If a teacher gets sick, it is up to the job to find teachers to keep the classroom running oppose to a home setting center. If the teacher gets sick a home daycare, then, the parents will have to find somewhere else for their child to attend school because that person cannot care for their child/children or the parent will have to take off of work themselves.

The agency I am doing my internship at is SEK-CAP CHOICES Head Start here in Pittsburg, Kansas. I am following a family service worker who works with families to reach their individual potential for self-sufficiency. In this paper I will talk about the history, the structure and support, direct services, and cultural awareness of SEK-CAP CHOICES.

A descriptive study by Okpych (2015) began to characterize the aging out population from the perspective of service provision and associated youth and state characteristics, based on the National Youth in Transition Database (NYTD) service data (FY2011 and FY2012). Among 131,204 service eligible youth, only 50.2% received CFCIP services; of the 13 CFCIP services examined, the top six most frequently received services (>20% of eligible youth aged 18 or older) were family support/marriage education, budget and financial management, health education and risk prevention, housing education and home management, career preparation, and postsecondary education support; more female youth received services than male youth; African American youth overall received less services than other ethnic groups. Further, continuous measures of service receipt (e.g., average number of service type received) indicated that youth only received on average 4-5 services out of the 13 possible service types. There were between-state differences in the proportion of foster care youth reported to be receiving CFCIP services, with over 62% of the states serving at least half of eligible youth, and the remaining 38% states serving less than half of eligible youth. Other regional differences in the offering of service type and service

The child’s family and community must be involved in this program if there are improvements to be made. Each program is different and is reflective of local community goals, and objectives. The second goal is to increase social competence in children of low income families. Where the term social competence is the child’s everyday effectiveness in dealing with the environment and later life responsibilities. This includes cognitive and intellectual development, physical and mental health, nutritional needs and other factors (Washington & Oyemade, 1987, p.

The welfare system has helped families from around the 1930’s. Social welfare in the United States consists of groups of variety programs. The programs are designed to assist people who are in need of assistance. The goal of the welfare program is to reduce poverty. Poverty undermines the economy by disturbing the normal growth of human capital. Including education, health and professional experience. All the welfare programs require different means of eligibility. There are programs that help with food, housing, Pell Grants, child care, and health care. In this paper I will give a brief review of the most popular programs. I will also tell the requirements to receive benefits. Then I will include a government review of fraud within the

This paper was prepared for Social Welfare Institutions and Program, SWK, 639, Section 81, taught by Professor Yvonne Johnson

Americans all across the nation have become blind to the fact that the welfare system has created a sense of comfortable distress amongst them; Americans feel safe with knowing that they have benefits to turn to when in need but are also distraught about the actions and well-beings of the welfare system in future times because they are so comfortable with the system. With so many bad effects outweighing the good effects that welfare programs bring to the table, there is a need to say that these programs are temporarily helpful but not valuable towards society. The current welfare programs that are established are not beneficial towards the progression of society because the programs deprive the independence of individuals, allow continuous poverty to still be an economic issue, and intensify the fraudulent cases of criminal activity.

According to the Administration for Children and Families (2010), “Head Start is a national program that promotes school readiness by enhancing the social and cognitive development of children through the provision of educational, health, nutritional, social and other services to enrolled children and families” (para. 3). Based on this mission subject, it is possible to subject Head Start to a program evaluation based on the following questions: (a) Is Head Start provisioning educational, health, nutritional, social and other services to enrolled children and families? (b) Is the provisioning of educational, health, nutritional, social and other services leading to an enhancement of the social and cognitive development of children? (c) Is the social and cognitive development of children a social good for which taxpayers should pay $7 billion a year? These questions will be addressed, both directly and indirectly, later in this overview.

It is crucial to consider cultural considerations when performing a program evaluation. In this particular program evaluation that involves looking into areas that are community outreach centers, schools, after school programs, juvenile justice systems, an addiction centers encompass a vast array of cultural and socio-economic standings. There may be those that are from low income or poverty communities.