This document describes the results of a study that tested the effects of relationship education programs on families, some of whom were involved with child welfare services (CWS). The study involved randomly assigning families to participate immediately in couples groups or fathers groups, or to a delayed group. Preliminary results found benefits for both CWS and non-CWS families who participated immediately, including reduced anxiety, drug and alcohol use, relationship conflict, harsh parenting, and child behavior problems. More positive effects were seen for couples group participants and CWS families. The results provide early evidence that relationship education programs may help improve outcomes for at-risk families.

3. CURRICULUM BASED ON
THEORY AND EVIDENCE
THERE ARE 5 DOMAINS OF FAMILY
LIFE THAT AFFECT FAMILY
MEMBERS’ WELL-BEING
OUR CURRICULUM ADDRESSES ALL
5 ASPECTS OF FAMILY LIFE (It’s not
just a parenting class or
communication skills training.)

4. 1. PARENTS AS INDIVIDUALS
2. The COUPLE RELATIONSHIP
3. PARENT-CHILD
RELATIONSHIPS
4. FAMILY OF ORIGIN PATTERNS
5. STRESSORS and SUPPORTS

5. FAMILY SYSTEMS PERSPECTIVE MISSING
Culture
Economic forces
Work Friends
Social support Social support
and Life Stress and Life Stress
Peers
School

6. Supporting Father Involvement
Development and Evaluation Team
Philip Cowan and Carolyn Pape Cowan,
University of California, Berkeley
Marsha Kline Pruett, Smith College
Kyle Pruett, Yale University
Peter Gillette, University of California Berkeley
Data Manager

7. SUPPORTING FATHER INVOLVEMENT
Random Assignment to:
Informational 16 week 16 week
session* Fathers Couples
groups* groups*
*A Case Manager for every study family
Bi-monthly consultation for site staff
• Pre-intervention (baseline) assessments
• Post-intervention assessments 9 months after baseline
• Follow-up assessments 18 months after baseline

8. Participants
Supporting Father Involvement
PHASE I
289 families completed pre and posttests
67% Mexican American (an African American
sample added later)
75% married
20% cohabiting
5% not living together

9. Results (2-1/2 yr followup)
PARENTS FROM CONTROL GROUP
One 3-hour group meeting
• Stayed the same or got worse over time
(no change in father involvement, couple
satisfaction down, symptoms up)
• Reported more behavior problems in their
children than they had on entering study.

10. PARENTS FROM FATHERS AND
COUPLES GROUPS
Met weekly for 16 weeks/32 hrs
• Mothers and fathers reported more
father involvement in caring for children.
• Parents reported no change in child
behavior problems since entry to project.

11. PARENTS FROM COUPLES GROUPS
Showed additional benefits:
• Their parenting stress declined
• They showed no decline in couple
relationship satisfaction – which we
found in couples in both the control
group and the fathers groups.

12. Positive Benefits Endure Over
Time
Baseline 9 months 18 months 2.5 years
2 months 11 months 22 months
after groups end after groups end after groups end

13. These intervention results have now
been replicated with another 280
low-income families – Hispanic and
Caucasian – and more recently at a
site with 40 African American
families.

14. Dissemination throughout
California by Strategies
Danny Molina (and others)
www.SupportingFatherInvolvement.org/strategies
• Information
• Agency father-friendliness
• Technical assistance to run SFI
groups

15. NEW PHASE IV
50% CWS FAMILIES
-- referred by Child Welfare staff
-- couples assessed as safe to work with
together; child not being abused now
50% NON-CWS FAMILIES
-- recruited as in previous phases

16. Random assignment to:
COUPLES FATHERS
GROUP (2/3) GROUP (1/3)
NOW(2/3) DELAY(1/3) NOW(2/3) DELAY(1/3)
Intervention effect? Intervention effect?

17. CAUTIONARY NOTE
• Only first third of families = 100/300
• Only to first posttest (intervention results
often better at second posttest)
• Almost all data from couples groups (90
vs 10)
• No data on some important measures
(Child Abuse Potential, Danger
Assessment)

18. COMPLEXITIES
Effects can be found for Non-CWS, CWS,
or BOTH;
Effects can be found for MOMS, DADS, or
BOTH

19. HERE COME THE ARROWS
= MOMS only
= DADS only
= MOMS and DADS

20. Positive effects of participation in
group can occur in different ways

21. DELAY NOW
No
effect
No
effect
Positive
effect
Positive
effect

22. SO……………
Just relax
And enjoy the story……….

23. INDIVIDUAL ADJUSTMENT

24. Anxiety symptoms
DELAY NOW
NON-
CWS
CWS

25. Frequency of drug use
DELAY NOW
NON-
CWS
CWS

26. Frequency of alcohol use
DELAY NOW
NON-
CWS
CWS

27. COUPLE RELATIONSHIP

28. Conflict between parents
DELAY NOW
NON-
CWS
CWS

29. Violent problem solving
DELAY NOW
NON-
CWS
CWS

30. Collaborative problem solving
DELAY NOW
NON-
CWS
CWS

31. PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP

32. FATHER INVOLVEMENT
DELAY NOW
NON-
CWS
CWS

33. Harsh parenting
DELAY NOW
NON-
CWS
CWS

34. CHILD BEHAVIOR

35. Hyperactive AND
Anxious/depressed
DELAY NOW
NON-
CWS
CWS

36. COMPARISON OF NOW AND DELAY
Non-CWS CWS
INDIVIDUAL
Anxiety √
Drug use √√ √√
Alcohol use √ √
COUPLE
Conflict √√
Violent Prob √√
Solving
Collaborative Prob. √√
Solving

37. COMPARISON OF NOW AND DELAY
Non-CWS CWS
PARENTING
Father √
involvement
Harsh parenting √√ √√
CHILD
Hyperactivity √√
Anxiety/depression √√

38. Remember:
These results are
PRELIMINARY