The actual cost of your program may differ from the estimates derived here if features of your program that we do not ask about (such as staff education) differ from those of the 111 programs on whose costs we based our estimates. These estimates should be viewed as good general cost estimates that can be adjusted if one has more detailed information. Within certain program parameters the median cost is the same as either the high or low cost. This reflects the actual cost data distribution.
Research Methodology Overview
The sample of programs on which we have based our results does not represent the universe of OST programs across the country, nor is it intended to represent an average OST program. Our goal was to clarify the costs of quality OST programs. Therefore, the sampling strategy was designed to select programs that have operational practices and components that have been shown in scientific research to be associated with quality.
Working in six cities—Boston, Charlotte, Chicago, Denver, New York and Seattle—the study team solicited recommendations of highly regarded OST programs from key informants. This request yielded an initial pool of more than 600 programs that were categorized according to a typology of relevant program characteristics such as: age group of students, location, operator—(school-operated or operated by a community-based organization) regardless of location, program focus and schedule of operation. Our goal was to have a relatively even distribution of programs in each city that would constitute the full range of relevant OST characteristics.
To narrow the pool and ensure that our sample included programs with quality characteristics, the study team used three criteria: two research-validated structural “markers” of high-quality OST programming (staff/youth ratios and participation rates) and a maturity measure (years of operation).
- Staff/youth ratios: For elementary-school-age children, it could not exceed 1:20; for middle- and high-school-age children, it could not exceed 1:25.
- Participation rates: ES/MS programs must have had at least three quarters of participants attend the activities they were scheduled to attend most (or all) of the time they were scheduled. For high-school-age participants, programs could be drop-in.
- Years of operation: To ensure that our sample focused on established programs with a track record of strong performance, we screened out programs that had been in operation less than two years.
We first categorized the more than 600 programs (as best we could) into 36 program types defined by combinations of the characteristics listed. Then, within each city, we randomly picked programs in each of the cells and attempted to interview the executive directors to confirm the programs’ characteristics, assess these selection criteria and collect information about an array of other quality. These included, for example, a clear organizational mission; small group sizes; adequate space and materials; formal orientation, training and performance reviews for staff; regular staff meetings; and formal feedback from participating youth and parents. Of the 494 programs we contacted, 215 met the 3 criteria listed above. We attempted cost interviews with 196 of them; 111 completed the survey.
The final sample included 111 programs with sufficient capacity to complete the detailed surveys and follow-up interviews that the study team conducted to collect the relevant cost data. Programs with directors who were unable or unwilling to provide information on all elements of the data collection protocol were eliminated from the final sample.
Data Collection
Cost data were initially collected through detailed surveys that program directors completed by hand or by phone. To ensure that the information provided in the survey was as complete and accurate as possible, the study team conducted follow-up phone interviews with key staff. This information was then compared to information in program budgets and annual reports. Wherever possible, the study team obtained documentation to support the valuation of goods and services received as in-kind contributions.
For each program, the study team captured the full cost of operation. This is the sum of out-of-pocket cash expenditures and the value of in-kind contributions, including donated space. Earlier OST cost studies have not included space because none combined the costs of school-based and community-based programs in which space costs are likely to be quite different.
The typical program serving elementary students in our sample was able to get 17% of resources for free through volunteer time, donated space, and other in-kind goods and service. The remaining 83% was paid directly out of the program’s funds.
The typical program serving teens in our sample was able to get 18% of resources for free through volunteer time, donated space, and other in-kind goods and service. The remaining 82% was paid directly out of the program’s funds.