WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION

Strengthening Families 10-14

Fortaleciendo Familias 10-14

OSPI Student Support Conference

Drew BetzRenee Overath

May 2013

Background

"Evidence-based" programs are prevention methodologies that have been developed and evaluated using scientific processes. Experts use commonly agreed-upon criteria for rating interventions, reaching a consensus that evaluation research findings are credible and sustainable. Evidence-based is also referred to as science-based and research-based models.

Program Strengths

• Internationally Recognized as Best Practice Model, modified to country and cultures

• Effective at reducing risk factors in youth and increasing parenting skills and family functioning

• Sessions for parents, youth and families in each of 7 lessons.

Parent Risk Factors– Harsh and

Inconsistent Discipline– Unclear Communication

of Rules– Lack of Warmth

Risk and Protective Factors Addressed in Program

Parent Protective Factors– Clear and Age-

Appropriate Expectations– Support and Family

Involvement– Expression of Love and

Appreciation

Risk and Protective Factors Addressed in Program

Risk and Protective Factors Addressed in Program

• Youth Risk Factors– Poor Relationships with

Parents– Lack of Goals– Negative Peer Influences

Risk and Protective Factors Addressed in Program

• Youth Protective Factors– Ability to Regulate

Emotions– Good Relationships with

Parents– Peer Resistance Skills and

Future Orientation

Pictures Speak More Loudly than Words

Ingredients for success of local programs

•4 Trained facilitators •1 site coordinator•Curriculum* & supplies•Dinner each night•Child Care•3 meeting areas •Recruitment & reminders•Teen panel last week•Pre- and post-survey

Curriculum Materials415 – page leader guide with masters for

handouts

DVD’s (updated 12/06)• Discuss adolescent development and

model skills• Actors are Latino, African-American, and

white• 8 parent DVDs• 1 youth DVD for 2 sessions• 2 family DVDs

Love and Limits magnets for home practice

+ consumable supplies for youth & family activities

Government Funders: Federal Government (CYFAR), Washington State (DBHR, OSPI, others?), County Health Depts., 1/10 of 1% mental health tax set aside

Private Foundations.

Local Partners: School Districts, non-profits, churches, ESD, businesses, tribes, PTA/O, others?

Collaborate! to produce program ingredients

Hands On

• What I Do Well as a Parent/Caregiver, Parent Session 1

• Concerns of Parent/Caregivers,Youth Session 2

• Listening Game, Family Session 5

Hands On

• Debrief– What piece worked

best for you and why?– What did you learn

about the job of the parent/caregiver?

– What did you learn about yourself?

Program Results

WSU Human Development Department Prevention Researcher Dr. Laura Hill and graduate students have been conducting program evaluations since 2002.

Data from 347 programs in 27 counties, 2459 families are in our data set.

Program Results

We measured improvement in four family protective factors:

Rules About Substance Use

Positive Involvement

Family Harmony

Communication

Program Results

We also measured family and individual protective factors from the youths’ perspective:InvolvementRewardsAttachmentFamily HarmonyManagement

Results show a significant difference between pre and post program scores for ALL measures.

Cultural and Ethnic Differences in Experience of an Evidence-based Prevention Program

Washington State University, Department of Human Development, Extension, and CYFARStocker, L.M., Crawford, J.K., Shrestha, G., Eaton, A., Betz, D., Overath, R., and Hill. L.G.

American Indian Parent Comments (N = 74)

Latino(a) / Hispanic Parent Comments (N = 63)

European American Parent Comments (N = 63)

SFP Washington State Website – Visit us!

Over the last elevenyears, SFP (10-14) has been conducted in

27 of Washington’s 39 counties *

http://sfp.wsu.edu

References

Foxcroft, D.R., Lister, Sharp, D., Lowe, G., Sizer, R., Ireland, D. (2002) Primary Prevention of Alcohol Misuse by Youth People. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006 (Issue 1).

Hill, L.G., Maucione, K., & Hood, B (2007). A Focused Approach to Assessing Fidelity. Prevention Science, 8, 25-34.

Jones, D., Bumbarger, D.K., Greenberg, M.T., Greenwood, P, and Kyler, S. (2008) The Economic Return on PCCD’s Investment in Research-Based Prevention Programs : A Cost-Benefit Assessment of Delinquency Prevention. Pennsylvania State University: Prevention Research Center

Spoth, R. L., Redmond, C., Trudeau L., & Shin C. (2002). Longitudinal substance initiation outcomes for a universal preventive intervention combining family and school programs. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 16, 129-134.

Spoth, R.L. et al. "Randomized trial of brief family interventions for general populations: adolescent substance use outcomes 4 years following baseline." Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 2001, 69(4), 627-642. 1744a 10.2 in 10.2 419.

Wisconsin Clearinghouse for Prevention Resources http://wch.uhs.wisc.edu/01-Prevention

National Registry of Evidence Based Programs and Practices

http://nrepp.samhsa.gov/

Strengthening Families Program: For Parents and Youth 10-14

Abstract: The Strengthening Families Program: For Parents and Youth 10-14 (SFP 10-14) is a family skills training intervention designed to enhance school success and reduce youth substance use and aggression among 10- to 14-year-olds. It is theoretically based on several etiological and intervention models including the biopsychosocial vulnerability, resiliency, and family process models. The program includes seven 2-hour sessions and four optional booster sessions in which parents and youth meet separately.