Francesca Adler-Baeder, Ph.D., CFLE Human Development and Family Studies

1. Family Connections in Alabama:Lessons Learned from a Pilot Project focused on marriage strengthening among low-resource families Francesca Adler-Baeder, Ph.D., CFLE Human Development and Family Studies Alabama Cooperative Extension System Auburn University, Alabama

2. Project Description • Special Improvement Project through U.S. DHHS (Office of Child Support Enforcement) - awarded for January-December 2003 • Addressed Program Announcement’s Priority : encouraging new ways to approach unwed parents to emphasize the importance of healthy marriage to a child’s well-being • Partnership between The Children’s Trust Fund of Alabama (state agency) and Auburn University (state Land-grant Institution) and 4 local agencies. • Supported by the State Office of Child Support Enforcement and the Family Assistance Division (Department of Human Resources) • 4 pilot sites in Alabama • Mobile County Health Department’s TEEN Center (Urban) • Choctaw County Alabama Cooperative Extension System agency (Rural) • Parents and Children Together (PACT) (Suburban/Urban) • Sylacauga Alliance for Family Enhancement (SAFE) Family Service Center (Rural) • Involved Alabama Coalition against Domestic Violence representatives • Utilized existing personnel, infrastructure, and reputation in the communities.

3. Alabama Children’s Trust Fund: Alicia Luckie, Project Director Lisa Castaldo, Program Manager Auburn University, HDFS Dept. Joe Pittman, Consultant GRAs: Laura Lippert, Sarah Armstrong, Jackie Pflieger, Brian Higginbotham, Amy Long Mobile County Health Department’s TEEN Center (Urban) Sheron Montgomery-Thames, Executive Director Felecia Allen ACES of Choctaw County (Rural) Elaine Shields, Extension Agent Parents and Children Together (Suburban/Urban) Tiki Hubbard, Executive Director Susan Roberts SAFE Family Service Center (Rural) Margaret Morton, Executive Director Facilitators: Shelia Sharpe Lavelle Gaines Odessa Turner Amy Pope Linda Batts Gloria Rodriquez Linda Burton Pamela Lee Lecia Whiteside Ollie Kates Heather Bakane Johnnie Heartfield Russell McCathcen Harold Jones Sandy McQueen Project Personnel

4. Caring for My Family(Michigan State Extension) http://www.fcs.msue.msu.edu/cfmf/(Shirer, Contreras, & Spicer, 2002) • Built explicitly on the information from the Fragile Families study • Field tested with target audience (new mothers) for topics, language, and activities • Topics include: • Importance of couple connections/stability, healthy relationships and marriage • Importance of 2 involved parents • Relationship skills and marriage “readiness” skills • Identifying unhealthy relationships • Decision-making skills • Building self-efficacy and intentionality • Setting goals for your child’s future, your parenting and your family • Strategies for economic stability • Strategies to build support systems

5. New Parents: Current or Potential Couple Relationship Implement CFF Curriculum Raise Awareness Improve Knowledge Improve skills/abilities • Improved understanding of healthy • and unhealthy couple relationships/marriage – and the impact on child well-being • Improved individual skills • Improved Relationships • Acquired Marriage Readiness Skills

6. Program Impact Study Participants: • 162 participants; 138 completed (14% attrition rate) • 126 women; 36 men • Age: Women = 26; Men = 28; target child = 2

7. Program Impactpre/post program changes • Statistically significant increases were found in: • Couple quality dimensions : Level of trust and Level of happiness in relationship • Individual empowerment • Identification of strengths • Stress management skills • Problem-solving skills • Understanding the importance of recognizing and leaving an unhealthy relationship • Cooperative Co-parenting: Better attitudes and practices • Statistically significant decreases were found in: • Individual distress level • Negative Couple Interaction • Level of verbal aggression in the relationship (both their own and their partner’s) • Participating with a partner did not appear to be an advantage in documented change patterns • participants attending singly benefited in similar ways • Control subjects did not demonstrate similar patterns of desired change across time.

9. Qualitative information from facilitators Overwhelmingly positive responses • enjoyment and comfort with the curriculum • “participants were more responsive to this curriculum and topics than any other program I’ve worked with” • learning environment is non-threatening • desire for more long-term programs • “we had some sessions where they didn’t want to leave” • “They asked if they could keep coming back”

10. Qualitative information from participants • gained an awareness of the importance of healthy relationships • I wish I’d had this class before…I know I was in an abusive, unhealthy relationship before • improvements in relationships • It pulled me and my partner closer together…it gave me a better heart • Me and my baby dad was not getting along until we started this class • improved individual skills • commitment to working on their relationship • ..I want to keep our family together • goals centered on family stability and healthy relationships • It helped me to make better decisions concerning my family

11. Challenges • Recruiting fathers • Diverse situations in same group • Addressing complex family (co-parenting) relationships • Control group retention

12. What worked well • Recruitment and retention • Established trusted community agencies and facilitators necessary • Investment/Interest by facilitators to add this program to their offerings • Collaboration • Incentives/Motivation for participating • CFF curriculum • Personalizing information and hands-on activities • The “memory” book • Group settings were a preference

13. Recommendations • Male/Female facilitators • Invest in training and training updates • Increased community collaboration for recruitment and referral • Add to umbrella of services (can be embedded or separate) • Address co-parenting relationships and adjustment to parenting • Similar couple contexts grouped • Long-term participation (12-18 months). Test various delivery methods/contexts • Document/evaluate and follow-up

14. Overall: • Initial evidence of desired program effects among more vulnerable population. • Desire/interest is strong for both facilitators and target participants • Viewed as important addition to family services