Indirect effects of the Family Check‐Up on youth extracurricular involvement at school‐age through improvements in maternal positive behavior support in early childhood

Abstract

Extracurricular involvement in the school‐age years has widespread potential benefits for children's subsequent socioemotional development, especially for low‐income youth. However, there is a dearth of research on interventions aimed at increasing school‐age extracurricular involvement in low‐income youth. Thus, the present study aimed to test the collateral effect of a brief, family‐focused intervention for low‐income families, the Family Check‐Up, on children's school‐age extracurricular involvement via improvements in maternal positive behavior support (PBS) in early childhood. The sample (n = 630, 50% female, 50% White, 28% Black/African American) represented a subsample of families from the Early Steps Multisite Study. At the age of two, families were randomly assigned to the Family Check‐Up or Women, Infants, and Children Nutritional Supplement Services as usual. Mother‐child dyads participated in observed interaction tasks at child ages 2 and 3 that were subsequently coded to assess PBS. Primary caregivers reported on children's school‐age extracurricular involvement at ages 7.5, 8.5, and 9.5. Results indicated that although there was not a direct path between intervention status and children's school‐age extracurricular involvement, a significant indirect path emerged from intervention group to changes in PBS between ages 2 to 3 to children's school‐age extracurricular involvement. The results are discussed in terms of implications for designing preventive interventions in early childhood that promote extracurricular involvement at school‐age, particularly for children at risk for maladaptive outcomes.

The Family-Check-Up® Autism Implementation Research (FAIR) Study: protocol for a study evaluating the effectiveness and implementation of a family-centered intervention within a Canadian autism service setting

“…Concurrent with the effectiveness evaluation, we will conduct a mixed-methods study aimed at evaluating delivery of the model and describing contextual factors and barriers to FCU® implementation and sustainability within a regional autism service setting. This work will be informed by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework ( 34 ), which focuses on evidence-based practice implementation in publicly funded services, and the FCU® Implementation Framework ( 35 ), which emphasizes the inner context and FCU®-specific facilitators and barriers at each EPIS stage ( 36 ). Specifically, implementation aims are to:…”

“…The FCU® was developed by Dr. T. Dishion and colleagues in response to decades of research demonstrating how family ecology shapes child mental health risk and resilience ( 29 , 40 ), and unmet needs for prevention and interventions that effectively engage parents and caregivers living in stressful circumstances. It has been adapted to include families of children from infancy age to young adulthood, and has demonstrated sustained ( 42 ), reliable and robust positive effects on multi-informant reports of child, adolescent, and young adult outcomes that are highly relevant to ASD, including direct and indirect effects on: emotional self-regulation ( 43 ), disruptive behavior ( 44 ), extra-curricular involvement ( 35 ) and academic achievement ( 45 ), depressive symptoms ( 46 ), suicidality ( 47 ), family connectedness to service ( 30 ), and caregiver mental health ( 44 ). The program has demonstrated effective delivery within homes ( 29 ), clinics ( 48 ), and schools ( 49 ).…”

“…The FCU ® was developed by Dr. T. (35) and academic achievement (45), depressive symptoms (46), suicidality (47), family connectedness to service (30), and caregiver mental health (44).…”

Extracurricular involvement in the school-age period and adolescent problem behavior among low-income youth.

“…For the present study, data from the age 7.5, 8.5, 9.5, 14, and 16 assessments were used. Families participated in 1.5- to 3-hr home visits, during which primary caregivers (PCs; mostly biological mothers) completed demographic interviews and questionnaires about their children’s extracurricular involvement and psychosocial functioning (Feldman et al, 2021). The following individuals also contributed information about the target youth’s socioemotional adjustment: target youth (ages 14 and 16), alternate caregivers (ACs; i.e., adults identified by PCs as someone who helped take care of the target youth; ages 7.5, 8.5, 9.5, 14, and 16), and teachers (ages 7.5, 8.5, 9.5, and 14).…”

“…At ages 7.5, 8.5, and 9.5, PCs completed the Parent Aftercare Survey (PAS), a 69-item assessment of children’s after-school care adapted from measures used in the Promising After-School Practices Study (Feldman et al, 2021; Rosenthal & Vandell, 1996). A count of the different types of activities in which the target child participated during the past year was obtained and averaged across ages 7.5, 8.5, and 9.5 (α = .71).…”