Local Parenting Programs Prove Worthwhile for Families and Taxpayers

A team of researchers set out to learn whether two well‑known parenting programs could deliver better value than the usual care given to families with young children. The programs examined were the Positive Parenting Program (Triple P) and the Circle of Security Parenting Program (COSP). The study followed families for a full year, tracking costs and child wellbeing.

The investigators recruited 502 caregivers, most of them women, whose children ranged from two to six years old. Caregivers reported how much money was spent on health and social services over the one‑year period, using a questionnaire about service use. They also rated their children’s quality of life with a preschool health scale and a child utility index. The team ran extra checks to see if the results held up when assumptions changed, such as variations in program delivery costs.

When the numbers were crunched, the cost difference between Triple P and usual care was about $121, with a possible range that could be a loss or a gain. The gain in quality‑adjusted life years was tiny, around 0.009. For the Circle of Security group, costs were actually lower by roughly $253, and the QALY gain was about 0.004. If a typical benchmark of $100,000 per QALY is used, the chance that each program represented good value was roughly 70 %. The extra checks did not change these conclusions, suggesting both programs use public money wisely.

actions