The Supporting Healthy Marriage Evaluation

1
The Supporting Healthy Marriage Evaluation

• Design, Early Lessons, and Progress to Date
• Barbara Goldman, MDRC
• ACF/OPRE 10th Annual Welfare Research and
  Evaluation Conference June 4-6, 2007

2
What is the Supporting Healthy Marriage (SHM)
Evaluation?

• Random assignment study in multiple sites around
  the country
• Interventions aimed at healthy marriage among
  low-income married couples
• Created and funded by Administration for Children
  and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human
  Services
• Conducted by MDRC, Abt Associates, Child Trends,
  Optimal Solutions Group, with many additional
  experts and consultants

3
Why Marriage Education for Low-income Married
Couples?

• Strategy for improving well-being of low-income
  children through improving parents relationships
• Children whose parents are married and in
  low-conflict relationships tend to do better on
  many outcomes
• Low-income couples marriages are more likely to
  end in separation or divorce, so their children
  are less likely to experience these benefits

4
What Do We Know from Existing Research?

• Marriage education programs can bring about
  improvements in couple relationships
• Limitations of prior research
• Small studies
• Mostly middle-class, white couples
• Often short-term follow-up studies when
  long-term, impacts fade over time
• We know little about their effectiveness for
  low-income couples

5
Important Principles Guiding SHM

• Reliance on research to shape intervention
• Skills-based approach (not therapy or marital
  counseling)
• Voluntary participation
• Focus on couples, fathers as well as mothers
• Emphasis on healthy marriage and relationships
• Alertness about domestic violence

6
Who will an SHM program serve?

• Married, adult couples with children
• Both spouses must volunteer
• Low to moderate income families
• Families without serious family violence issues

7
What does an SHM Program Look Like?

• Services delivered over 12 months
• SHM program components
• Core Marriage Education Curriculum (3 to 5
  months)
• Multi-sessions, groups, 30 hours
• Common set of topics (e.g., managing conflict and
  stress)
• Four curricula Within Our Reach, Becoming
  Parents Program, PAIRS, Loving Couples/Loving
  Children

8
Program Components (contd)

• Extended Marriage Education Activities (7-9
  months)
• Booster sessions, peer mentoring, coaching, group
  social events, date nights, family activities
• Family Support and Supplemental Services
  (Ongoing)
• Support participation and reinforce skills
• Identify family needs and link couples with
  supplemental services (e.g., child care,
  transportation, emergency assistance, employment,
  mental health, etc.)
• Encourage safe disclosure of domestic violence
  and link to appropriate services

9
Program Implementation

• Identification
• Of
• Pilot Sites

10
SHM Pilot Sites
11
SHM Pilot Sites Variety of Settings

• University-based
• Orlando, Florida University of Central Florida
  Operates a family and marriage clinic and
  research institute
• Seattle, Washington Becoming Parents Program
  Formerly university-based, now a private
  curriculum developer / service provider target
  expectant married couples
• Mental health HMO
• Bronx, New York University Behavioral
  Associates behavioral management services
  organization part of Montefiore Medical Center
  accessing medical, mental health and substance
  abuse care target clinics

12
SHM Pilot Sites

• Non-profit community organizations
• Kansas (two locations) Catholic Charities
  (Kansas City and Wichita) faith-based, working
  in conjunction with Kansas Healthy Marriage
  Initiative
• Multi-service family centers
• Shoreline, Washington Center for Human Services
  several family support centers providing
  parenting, youth, counseling services
• Pennsylvania (three locations) Community
  Prevention Partnership (Reading), Family Answers
  (Bethlehem), Family Service Partners (Harrisburg)
  
• Texas (two locations) San Antonio Family
  Service Association marriage education added to
  existing counseling services. Texas HHSC in lead

13
SHM Pilots

• Head Start/Childrens services
• Texas El Paso Childrens Center. Working with
  entire family (parents and children)
• For-Profit Organizations
• Oklahoma Public Strategies, Inc. Operating
  Building Strong Families program, now targeting
  married expectant couples

14
Update on SHM Activities

• 8 sites starting pilots beginning May through
  September 2007
• Develop operational plan and budget
• Hire and train staff
• Providing technical assistance continuing to
  develop programs
• Operational benchmarks
• Pilot assessments
• Pilot survey to assess service differential
  between SHM and control groups
• Begin sample build-up for full evaluation sample
  (2007 2010)

15
Research Design

• Implementation Study and
• Impact Study

16
Implementation Study

• Key Questions
• What did the program look like? What was the
  operating environment?
• Who was served? What strategies were used to
  recruit, engage, and retain couples?
• What challenges did staff face in designing and
  implementing the program?
• Data Sources
• Field visits - observations, interviews, focus
  groups
• Program participation records (from MIS)
• Surveys

17
Impact Study

• Key Questions
• What were the effects on marital quality and
  stability? Mental health of each partner?
  Parenting / co-parenting? Child outcomes?
• What were the effects for different subgroups?
• Random Assignment Design
• Data Sources
• Baseline Data
• Surveys (12, 36, possibly 60 months)
• Videotaped observations of couple interactions

18
Assessing Program Operations

• Operational Benchmarks
• and
• Management Information Systems

19
Key Challenges in Early SHM Program Operations

• Recruit steady and adequate flow of couples
• Involve both husbands and wives
• Assure strong program (high participation,
  on-going contact, high quality)
• Assure strong test (large differential in
  SHM-type services received between SHM program
  and control group couples)

20
Multiple Users of the SHM MIS

• Program managers
• Track sample build-up from recruitment and
  referral through intake
• Track program services and activities
• Track marriage education groups (frequency)
• Program staff
• Day-to-day management of their caseloads
• SHM site team
• Monitor operational benchmarks
• Researchers
• Describe sample
• Inform implementation and impact research

21
MIS Central Tool to Manage New Program

• Intake and Eligibility
• Recruitment and referral through random
  assignment
• Real-time random assignment
• SHM Program Services
• Marriage education groups and attendance
• Extended marriage activities
• Contacts with spouses/couples
• Referrals, supplemental services, and incentives
• Reporting Functions

22
Key Features of MIS

• Track couples and each spouse (both husband and
  wife)
• User friendly encourage intake and program
  staff to direct enter information into system
• Accessibility to information create reporting
  functions so information can be easily retrieved
  by program managers and staff
• Staff need to find it helpful in doing their jobs
  electronic case notes, tickler systems
• Set a few important benchmarks, collect
  information, share with managers and staff, and
  use information to improve program operations

23
Using benchmarks to manage a new program

• Examples of simple benchmarks
• Overall level of recruitment of couples
  referred to program
• Productive recruitment (not just couples, but
  couples who are eligible and interested)
  couples randomly assigned/enrolled
• Timely engagement into services of enrolled
  couples attending at least one marriage education
  class within two months of enrollment
• Ensuring that the full multi-component program is
  being implemented
• of enrolled couples meeting with Family Support
  Worker at least once within two months of
  enrollment
• of enrolled couples attending at least one
  extended marriage activity

24
For more information
www.supportinghealthymarriage.org www.mdrc.org ba
rbara.goldman_at_mdrc.org