Promising Outcomes from Holistic Approach to Family Strengthening Programs

Transcription

1 Promising Outcomes from Holistic Approach to Family Strengthening Programs Janet C. Benavente, MHR 2013 Personal Finance Seminar for Professionals University of Maryland Doubletree Hotel Annapolis, Maryland

2 Research Indicators Disagreement over money is a top reason for relationship breakups / divorce. (Lawrence et.al., 1993) Financial stability (Dakin & Wampler, 2009 ) and positive child outcomes (Guzzo & Lee, 2008) are more likely in healthy relationships/marriages. Low income couples report higher psychological distress and lower marital satisfaction when compared to middle income couples. (Dakin & Wampler, 2009 ) Any opinions, findings, recommendations implied in this material are those of the author and do not reflect the views of the United States Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families.

3 How Colorado State University Extension Responded Sought and received external funding ( Healthy Marriage Demonstration Grant # 90FE0028 = $2.3 million) Selected a theory-based delivery model using evidencebased curricula. Delivered free financial education to 350 married or engaged adults between 2006 and Offered additional relationship and parenting education to the same participants. Provided one-to one coaching for up to 24 months after attending classes.

4 How the Community Helped 52 local agencies referred participants. 4 local agencies embedded financial education in their model. 15 agencies served on steering committee to review progress and make suggestions for improvement. 20 agencies provided in-kind support. (e.g. bustokens, child-care or meeting space)

5 Program Variations to Meet Community Needs Educational classes held evenings and weekends in addition to weekday daytime hours. Delivery methods varied: One-to-one during home visits by public health nurses Lunch time brown-bags for county employees At homeless shelters As part of workforce development options As option for individuals on probation or parole 1/3 of classes delivered in Spanish

6 Who Participated (N= 1345) Ethnicity Hispanic= 54% White Caucasian= 31% Other= 15% Work Unemployed = 59% Fulltime= 20% Part-time = 13% Education No HS or GED= 27% HS or GED= 40% Some College= 18 % College Degree= 15% Income 74% below the 2008 Poverty Threshold ($25,694 for household of 5) 61% below $14,000/ year Marital Status 75% married or co-habiting 25% single or engaged Classes taken Financial Ed= 26% Took WMR= 27% Took MPAP= 55% Took all three= 19%

7 Outcomes: Planned and Accomplished Outcome Planned Accomplished Improved financial literacy ( e.g.. Debt reduction, credit repair, identity protection, recordkeeping) Improved debt or credit profile (6-12 months post ) Improved communication skills related to financial situations 60% 79% 80% 82% No goal set 75% Satisfaction with the program 90% 98%

8 How and What Was Measured How Participants completed a survey pre class, immediate post class, and 6,12,18 and 24 months post class. Participants also completed a Family Development Plan (Forrest, et al. 2003) and reviewed it every 6 months. What Financial planning ( intent and behavior) Financial management ( intent and behavior) Perceived stress (self reported) Psychological well-being (self reported) Family functioning (self reported) Mental health related quality of life (self reported)

9 Instruments Used Parenting Alliance Measure. (Abindin & Brunner, 1995). Psychological Well-Being SOS-5 (Blais, 1998) Parenting Self-Agency Measure. Perceived Stress Scale (PSS; Cohen) Parenting Ladder. (survey adapted by Metzler & Jones (2007), from Pratt, McGuigan, & Katzev (2000) and Katzev (2000.) Family Functioning Style Scale (FFSS; Trivette, Dunst, Deal, Hamby, & Sexton, 1994) Conflicts Tactics Scale Short form (CTS-short form; Straus et al., 1973, 1998) Health Related Quality of Life (SF-8; Quality Metric Health Outcomes Solutions) Positive Parenting Behaviors (developed by Dr. Adler-Baeder, Auburn: ACHMI Couple/Marital Quality (Dyadic Adjustment Scale- Spanier, 1976) abbreviated Confidence/Dedication Scale (Stanley & Markman, 1992) Interpersonal Competence Scale (Buhrmeister et al., 1988), Satisfaction (Conger et al., 1990)

10 Pre to 18 mo. Post-program Comparison of Financial Understanding (t (385) = -7.07, p <.05; pre (M = 1.81, SD = 1.24) to 18 months follow-up (M = 3.03, SD = 1.11) pre class immediate post 6 months post 12 months post 18-months post

11 Level of Self-reported Psychological Well-being (Blais et al., 1999; Owen et al., 2008), t (393) = -2.62, p <.05; pre (M = 19.60, SD = 6.05) to 18 months follow-up (M = 21.77, SD = 6.17) pre immediate post 6 months post 12 months post 18 months post

12 Better Stress Management for economically diverse low-income populations (F (1,41) = 10.12, p <.05; p >.05 interaction)

13 Improved Family Functioning for ethnically diverse populations (F (1,26) = 5.74, p <.05; p >.05 interaction).

14 Qualitative Findings Educational or employment gains: We learned to maintain life style and finances so we will never become homeless again no matter what happens we will be OK. I have hopes for my future starting a long-term career to support my girls in a healthy way Program satisfaction: 94% This program was appropriate and useful for me and I would recommend it to friends. 99% Overall the quality of the program was excellent. Participation in community opportunities: 33% of participants got connected with community resources to improve their personal situation.

15 Lessons Learned Strong community connections contribute to recruitment, retention, and sustainability. Well designed evaluation model includes: Valid and reliable instruments Broad based outcome measures Both quantitative and qualitative data collection Follow-up period beyond 6 months Data sharing through out program life Holistic approach addresses the interplay among multiple facets of family life ( e.g. communication and conflict, education and employability, stress and decision-making, family stress/conflict and child outcomes.)

16 Acknowledgements Project Director and Principal Investigator- Janet C. Benavente, MHR Special thanks to: Evaluation- Sara Anne Tompkins, Ph.D. and Juliana Rosa, M.S. Family Development Workers -Stephanie Mastroantonio, B.S. and Hannah Green, B.S. Program Instructors -Nora Soto, A.A., Corinna Zamora,A,A., Sanika Anthony, M.S., Derik Jose Redondo,A..A., and Claudia Estrada Program Coordinator -Cindy Okada The purpose of this publication is the dissemination of information. Funding was provided through a grant from : U.S. Department of Health and Human Services-Healthy Marriage Demonstration Grant # 90-FE0028. The opinion, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this event and associated materials are those of the author(s), and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration of Children and Families.