Mathematica's family support experts recently completed the Building Strong Families (BSF) evaluation. Sponsored by the Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the project used a random assignment research design to test eight voluntary programs that offer relationship skills education and other support services to unwed couples who are expecting or have just had a baby. After three years, the study showed that BSF had no effect on the quality of couples' relationships and did not make them more likely to stay together or get married.

The Office of Planning, Research, & Evaluation (OPRE) released the report, "The Supporting Healthy Marriage Evaluation: Final Implementation Findings." This is the final report documenting the implementation by eight organizations of the yearlong, multi-component Supporting Healthy Marriage (SHM) program model of marriage and relationship education services. An earlier report, "The Supporting Healthy Marriage Evaluation: Early Impacts on Low-Income Families" presented findings on the impacts of SHM programs about 12 months after couples enrolled. This report presents information about implementation of the programs, the characteristics of couples who enrolled, and their participation in the programs. The project is being conducted by MDRC in collaboration with Abt Associates and other partners.

The Supporting Healthy Marriage (SHM) evaluation was launched in 2003 to test the effectiveness of a skills-based relationship education program designed to help low-income married couples strengthen their relationships and, in turn, support more stable and more nurturing home environments and more positive outcomes for children. The evaluation is led by MDRC, in collaboration with Abt Associates and other partners, and is sponsored by the Department of Health and Human Services.

The SHM evaluation includes a rigorous random assignment research design that compares outcomes for families who are offered SHM’s services with outcomes for a similar group of families who are not offered SHM services but can access other services in the community. The evaluation also includes this implementation study documenting how eight local programs delivered SHM’s services. The SHM program offers a voluntary, yearlong package of relationship and marriage education services for low-income married couples who have children or are expecting a child. The model has three complementary components: group workshops based on structured curricula; supplemental activities to build on workshop themes; and family support services to address participation barriers, connect families with needed resources, and reinforce curricular themes. This report presents final findings from the SHM implementation study, the characteristics of couples who enrolled, and their participation in the program.  (author abstract)

In 2002, the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) instituted the Community Healthy Marriage Initiative (CHMI) evaluation to document operational lessons and assess the effectiveness of community-based approaches to support healthy relationships, marriages, and child well-being. The evaluation is being conducted by RTI International and The Urban Institute. A component of the CHMI study involved an implementation study on initiatives approved by the Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) under authority of Section 1115 of the Social Security Act.1 The goals of the initiatives were to improve the child support systems through community engagement and healthy marriage and relationship education programs. Operationally, these goals included direct improvements to the child support program, like increasing the number of child support orders established, increasing paternity establishment, and increasing payment toward support obligations. The broader context for these operational goals was improving child well-being and increasing parental responsibility.

This is the final in a series of reports being produced on the implementation of demonstrations in 14 sites receiving grants under the 1115 waivers. Earlier reports covered the implementation of initiatives in Atlanta, Georgia; Boston, Massachusetts; Chicago, Illinois; Denver, Colorado; Grand Rapids, Michigan; Jacksonville, Florida; Lexington, Kentucky; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Nampa, Idaho; and New Orleans, Louisiana. This report focuses on the initiatives in Marion County, Indiana; Clark County, Ohio; Lakewood, Washington; and Yakima, Washington. The goal of the implementation studies was to describe the nature of the community initiatives, including recruitment and outreach strategies, targeting efforts, and innovative approaches for linking child support with healthy relationship and marriage support activities. This report examines key aspects of the initiatives’ community partnerships, design and implementation of service delivery, and links with child support. It does not present estimates of program impacts or effectiveness. The report is based on site visits conducted in 2010, 3 to 5 years after the initiatives were initially approved as well as information provided over the course of operations by grantees. Because these visits took place when the initiatives were ongoing, this report is not a complete accounting of what the initiatives accomplished or how many people they served over the course of their waivers. (author abstract)

The Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation within the Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Mathematica Policy Research conducted the Strengthening Families Evidence Review (SFER) to identify family-strengthening programs serving low-income couples with couple-based programming designed to enhance relationship or co-parenting skills. Compiling information from 54 studies of 39 programs, this catalog includes information on the program components, such as operations, and research conducted on the programs, such as study design. Each study is given a rating category based on the study's design, execution, and analysis.

In recent decades, there has been a widening gap between higher rates of marital instability for economically disadvantaged couples and lower rates for nondisadvantaged couples. In addition, out-of-wedlock birth rates have risen, while evidence has grown that children fare better, on average, when raised by both of their parents in stable low-conflict households. All of these trends were important rationales for the development of a federal Healthy Marriage Initiative (HMI) within the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. Through grants to a range of state and local agencies, the HMI emphasizes provision of marriage education, a voluntary preventive service aimed at providing interested couples with skills and information that may help them to develop and sustain successful marriages and relationships.

In this chapter, we introduce the Supporting Healthy Marriage (SHM) evaluation — the first large-scale, multisite experiment that tests marriage education programs for low-income married couples with children. The SHM conceptual framework recognizes multiple sources of relationship strength and weakness, and the project’s program model has followed this frame-work closely in adapting the content and delivery of marriage education services for low-income married parents. Eight sites (with some sites spanning multiple organizations) are operating SHM programs around the country. SHM is testing a relatively intensive and comprehensive form of marriage education designed specifically for low-income families. Its year-long program model packages a series of marriage education workshops with additional family support, including case management, supportive services, and referrals to outside services as needed. The evaluation includes two interrelated substudies — one focusing on sites’ experiences in implementing the SHM model and the other measuring program impacts on marital quality and stability, child well-being, and a range of other outcomes. (author abstract)

This report is a technical supplement to the 15-month impact report for the Building Strong Families (BSF) evaluation (Wood et al. 2010). It provides additional detail about the research design (Chapter I), analytic methods (Chapter II), and variable construction (Chapters III and IV) that were used for the 15-month analysis. Chapter V of this report provides a discussion of the subgroup analysis that was conducted. The full set of impact results generated as part of this analysis is included in the appendices of this volume. (author abstract)

The Building Strong Families (BSF) project is a large-scale program demonstration and rigorous evaluation to learn whether well-designed interventions can help interested romantically involved unmarried parents build stronger relationships and fulfill their aspirations for a healthy marriage if they choose to wed. The central question of the evaluation is whether interventions can succeed in helping these parents improve their couple relationships, enter into and sustain healthy marriages, and enhance the well-being of their children.  Sponsored by the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) at the U.S.  Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), the project has been underway since late 2002 and involves programs operating in seven sites.  This report analyzes the implementation of the BSF program in these sites and presents information on their development, operations and lessons learned, and provides context for the future analysis of program impacts on couples and their children.  Specifically, the report addresses the following questions:

What is the context in which programs are implemented?

How are participants identified as eligible for BSF and then enrolled in the program?

What are the characteristics of couples that choose to enroll in BSF?

How is the BSF model put into operation at local sites?

To what extent do enrolled couples attend and complete BSF?

What is the experience of couples enrolled in the BSF program?

What are the lessons learned that may be useful for other similar programs?

(author abstract)