The Value of Out-of-School Time Programs

What kind of benefits for youth can and should out-of-school-time (OST) programs produce? Academic gains? Enriching experiences? Safety and homework help?

A literature review conducted by the RAND Corporation on the value of OST programs helps answer this question. 

RAND researchers found that OST programs can generate multiple benefits for children. The value delivered, however, depends on the type and duration of programming offered. 

This conclusion, at first glance, may seem obvious. So why does it matter? Because differences in program goals, content, and outcomes often aren't considered when evaluating OST programs. Grouping programs according to these differences can provide a clearer picture of program effectiveness. 

RAND researchers suggest grouping OST programs into three categories: 

1) Specialty programs that help young people develop specific skills, like soccer or coding 

2) Multipurpose programs that include a mix of homework help, games, and enrichment 

3) Academically-focused programs that provide curriculum-based academic instruction delivered by a certified teacher 

Each kind of program tends to produce outcomes directly linked to its program content.

Additionally, the authors found that: 

• Program design and content should reflect program aims. To develop social and emotional skills, for example, programs must have some element aimed at achieving that goal.
• Academic programs can improve student outcomes. These are programs that provide curriculum-based academic instruction by a certified teacher. They should not be confused with homework help. 
• Youth must attend OST programs to benefit. Including academics does not necessarily reduce program attendance at the elementary school level. 

The authors' recommendations include:

• The value of OST experiences should be better cataloged and assessed. Benefits such as helping youth build relationships—with other adults and among other participants—are underreported. They are also understudied. 
• OST programs for low-income students are worthy of public investment. They should be funded at levels that support high-quality, intentional programming. Policymakers, funders, and others should incentivize development of this programming. 
• Expected OST outcomes should align with program content. Funders should expect those outcomes. Researchers should measure them.  
• Attendance matters. OST programs should track—and try to maximize—student attendance.