The Impacts of Dropout Prevention Programs

Beginning in the late 1980s, the U.S. Department of Education conducted three large evaluations of the effectiveness of dropout prevention programs. The longest and largest evaluation was conducted by Mathematica and examined the impacts of dropout prevention interventions that were funded by the federal School Dropout Demonstration Assistance Program (SDDAP). From 1988-1996, SDDAP provided federal support for local efforts to reduce the dropout rate, awarding grants to school districts, nonprofit community-based organizations, and educational partnerships.

Grants supported two kinds of programs: (1) targeted programs, and (2) restructuring programs. Targeted programs operated in schools or community organizations and provided services to help youths stay in school and improve their school outcomes. Restructuring programs promoted organizational and instructional reform in schools where dropping out was a widespread problem. Costs for the targeted programs averaged around $450,000 per program each year, and costs for restructuring programs averaged around $1 million per program each year.

This study looked at a range of questions, including how programs supported by SDDAP used their funds, what kinds of students were served, and whether programs kept students in school. The researchers studied the experiences of more than 20 programs and collected data for more than 10,000 students to measure program effects. For some programs, they also collected data from teachers and parents.

Key Findings

• The study found that middle school programs had a significant effect in reducing dropout only if they were implemented with high intensity. Programs that provided low-intensity supplemental services to at-risk students did not have any impact on student outcomes.
• Alternative middle school programs had significant positive impacts—they successfully kept kids in school and accelerated their academic progress.
• The programs, regardless of intensity, did not have an impact on student learning (for example, grades, test scores).
• High school programs focused on helping participants earn high school diplomas did not have an impact on reducing dropout, improving other school outcomes (for example, test scores, grades), or improving social-behavioral outcomes (for example, reducing pregnancy, increasing self-esteem).
• Programs that focused on helping students obtain General Educational Development (GED) certificates did have a positive effect on GED completion rates.
• School restructuring programs did not significantly affect student outcomes.