|
Policy Framework
One-third of all babies in the United States are born to unmarried mothers, and the fraction is even higher among low-income families. Although many children of unwed couples flourish, research has shown that, on average, they are at higher risk of living in poverty and of developing social, behavioral, and academic problems than are other children. Partly because of these findings, marriage now figures prominently in discussions about how public policy can help promote low-income parents’ self-sufficiency and children’s well-being. Although the idea of actively encouraging parents to marry is controversial, it is widely agreed that — at the time of their child’s birth — most unwed couples are romantically involved with one another, share an interest in their child’s well-being, and hope and expect to marry. But these shared interests and goals seldom culminate in marriage.
A demonstration led by Mathematica Policy Research (MPR) in collaboration with MDRC and three other subcontractors, the Building Strong Families (BSF) project is a large-scale demonstration of marriage and relationship education for low-income, romantically involved, unmarried couples who are expecting or who recently had a child together. It is also a rigorous evaluation of the programs’ implementation and effectiveness, using random assignment of eligible couples to either a program or control group. Launched in 2002 and funded by the Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the project has resulted in the operation of seven BSF programs.
Agenda, Scope, and Goals
Although sites individually tailored the BSF program model to their own particular situations, across all sites the model includes three main components:
- Group sessions in marriage and relationship skills to enhance couples’ understanding of marriage, with service delivery concentrated during the period soon before and soon after the birth of the child. This is the core component of BSF.
- Individual-level support from family coordinators, including encouragement for program participation, reinforcement of marriage and relationship skills, on-going emotional support, and assessment regarding the need for referrals to other services.
- Assessment and referral to family support services, including education, employment, parenting, physical and mental health, child care, legal issues, substance abuse, and domestic violence assistance.
The evaluation of the BSF programs will address questions on four interrelated topics:
- Organization. What organizational conditions — such as type of staff or number of services — make it possible to implement programs designed to promote healthy marriage among low-income unwed parents?
- Operations. What challenges arise in the design, implementation, and operation of BSF programs? What services do the programs offer, and how do they complement existing programs for low-income families?
- Participation. Who participates in BSF programs, for how long do they do so, and in what activities are they engaging? How does participation differ across subgroups?
- Impacts. How do BSF programs affect couples’ attitudes and expectations about marriage, the quality and stability of their relationships, and whether they marry? How do the programs affect parents, their relationships with their children, and their children’s well-being and development? Which program designs have the most beneficial effects?
Design, Sites, and Data Sources
Targeted at low-income couples who volunteered to participate, the BSF sample includes unmarried couples who had a biologically-related child under the age of three months or who were expecting a child at intake. In addition, couples had to be either unmarried but romantically involved or married after the conception of the child that made them eligible for the program. Each member of the couple had to be at least 18 years old and speak a language in which BSF was offered, English or Spanish. Finally, only couples who were not involved in domestic violence were eligible.
The seven BSF sites are located in Georgia (Atlanta), Maryland (Baltimore), Louisiana (Baton Rouge), Florida (Broward and Orange Counties), Indiana (Allen, Lake, and Marion Counties), Oklahoma, and Texas (Houston and San Angelo). Sample intake has ended in all seven sites, totaling 5,103 couples being randomly assigned to either BSF or a control group that could not receive BSF services.
Implementation analysis. Since the start of program operations, the research team has monitored BSF sites’ operations. An analysis of these findings appears in the report, Implementation of the Building Strong Families Program, prepared by the MPR team. This implementation analysis focuses on the programs’ design, development, and operations during the first six to 14 months of the evaluation. It also documents recruitment and enrollment practices, describes the characteristics of enrolled couples, provides data on program participation, and summarizes the experiences of participant couples in the program group. It is based on qualitative data from site visits to each location, information from ongoing monitoring efforts, and structured data recorded in each program’s management information system. The implementation report found that all sites successfully implemented the core marriage and relationship skills component, but achieving consistently high levels of ongoing participation by couples in group sessions proved challenging. Although not all couples attended group sessions, those who did got a substantial dose of relationship skills training.
Impact analysis. In each site, couples in the target population who were interested in the program were randomly assigned to the program or a control group. MPR is currently conducting a 15-month survey and is planning a second follow-up at about 36 months after random assignment. Based on the surveys, the research team (including both MPR and MDRC staff) will then estimate the BSF programs’ effects on parents’ earnings and use of public assistance; on mother-father relationships; on family structure and functioning; on fathers’ involvement in childrearing; on parent-child relationships and the home environment; and on children’s well-being and cognitive and social development.
What's Next
The research team plans to update the implementation findings in 2009, and the first impact analysis report is expected in 2010.
|
|
