NCT04227405TerminatedNot Applicable

TOGETHER: A Couple's Model to Enhance Relationships and Economic Stability

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University6 sites in 1 country584 target enrollmentStarted: July 12, 2016Last updated: February 26, 2024

Conditions

Trial Snapshot

Phase: Not Applicable
Status: Terminated
Sponsor: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Enrollment: 584
Locations: 6
Primary Endpoint: Information, Family Outcomes, Reporting, and Management (nFORM)- Post-test at 8 Weeks After Pre-test (Time2)

Study Overview Study Design Eligibility Criteria Outcomes Investigators Sites Records & Identifiers Similar Trials

Study Overview

Brief Summary

The current study sought to evaluate an intervention to promote healthy couple relationships and economic stability and mobility for low-income couples living in Northern Virginia (VA) and Montgomery and Prince George's Counties (MD). The approach proposed integrated two components:(1) a 20-hour evidence-informed couple group workshop called TOGETHER that integrates relationship and financial education, followed by an optional three-hour booster session three months after TOGETHER workshop and (2) case management (assessment of participant needs, development of Individual and Couple Development Plan(ICDP), referrals for social and mental health services, and referrals and coordination with job and career enhancement services, linking and coordination of all services as needed). The 20-hour workshop was offered in 8 sessions facilitated by couple and financial experts. The effectiveness of the program was evaluated through a randomized control trial in which couples were randomly assigned to a control group (n=147) or an intervention group (n=145). The control group received no intervention but a three-hour financial workshop after the last assessment was completed whereas the intervention couples participated in the 20-hour interventions and received case management. An independent local evaluator(AVAR, Consulting) participated in the design, implementation, and most of the data analysis. Participants had to be at least 18 years-old, living together for at least a year, and had no severe domestic violence issues, or untreated substance abuse or severe psychiatric disorders. If both partners were retired, couples were excluded from participation. Couples participated in an intake and enrollment meeting and were randomly assigned by a computer generated system to either the intervention or control group. Couples in both groups completed three sets of self-report measures: (1)Pre-test in first workshop session or at intake for control couples, (2)post-test in the last workshop session, or 8 weeks after the pre-test for control couples, and (3)follow-up six months after the post-test. After the six-month follow-up assessment, participation in the program was concluded. The study was largely funded by a Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood grant awarded by the Administration of Children and Families.

Detailed Description

The current project sought to promote healthy couple relationships and economic stability and mobility for low-income couples living in Northern Virginia (VA) and Montgomery and Prince George's Counties (MD) This project was funded by the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) under the Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood (HMRF) program from the beginning of the study until May 10, 2018. As of May 10, 2018 ACF continued to fund the intervention component but data collection and analysis for couples that had been randomized by then and continued to receive services and to complete assessments were funded by Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. The evaluation plan that included a randomized control trial (RCT) and was approved of by ACF for years 2016, 2017, and 2018 until the local evaluation was discontinued by ACF included the enrollment of 720 couples, out of which 360 couples would be randomly assigned to the intervention group and 360 couples to a control group. However, due to the unexpected termination of funding for the local evaluation, the program was evaluated with 292 couples (145 intervention group couples and 147 control group couples).

This project was developed and conducted by Project Director, Mariana Falconier, Ph.D. at Virginia Tech and Associate Director until December, 2018 and since then at the University of Maryland (UMD), and Jinhee Kim, Ph.D. at UMD. UMD was a subawardee of Virginia Tech. Virginia Tech subcontracted with SkillSource Group, Inc. for delivery of employment services and University of Maryland contracted with Family Services, Inc. for delivery of workshop services. ACF required the grantee to have an independent local evaluator and for that purpose Virginia Tech contracted with AVAR Consulting, involved in the implementation and outcome evaluations until August 31, 2018. Additional analyses were conducted by D. Mark Lachowicz from UMD.

Our approach integrated two components (1) a 20-hour evidence-informed couple group program called TOGETHER workshop that integrates relationship education and financial literacy skills and (2) case management (assessment of participant needs, development of Individual and Couple Development Plan, referrals for community services, and referrals and coordination with job and career enhancement services).

Short-term outcomes of this project's core intervention were expected immediately after completion of the last session of the TOGETHERR workshop whereas medium-term outcomes were anticipated six months after that last session. Expected measurable outcomes among program participants for objective 1 (improved personal well-being) included increased frequency of positive stress management, reduced psychological distress, decreased financial stress. Expected measurable outcomes for objective 2 (improved couple's relationship skills) included increased frequency of positive communication behaviors, increased frequency of positive conflict management behaviors, increased frequency of positive dyadic stress management, increased frequency of conjoint problem solving behaviors, increased satisfaction with couple's relationship, and increased comfort with financial styles and roles. Expected measurable outcomes for objective 3 (improved parenting and co-parenting) included increased frequency of positive parenting behaviors, increased closeness to children, and increased satisfaction with co-parenting. Expected measurable outcomes for objective 4 (improved financial literacy and capability) include increased financial literacy skills, increased financial self-efficacy, decreased use of alternative financial services, and increased financial management behaviors. Finally, expected measurable outcomes for objective 5 (improved employability, job placement, and retention) include decreased perceived barriers to employability, increased intentions and motivations for work, increased confidence in job skills, and increased employability, employment status, and retention. These outcomes were expected by comparing the intervention and control group outcomes in the RCT.

Outcomes were evaluated through self-report measures provided ACF and additional standardized measures selected by the Project Director and Associated Project Director. Measures were completed at baseline, 8 weeks after, and six-month follow up. Couples received gift cards for survey completion.

Study Design

Study Type: Interventional
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel
Primary Purpose: Prevention
Masking: None

Eligibility Criteria

Ages: 18 Years to — (Adult, Older Adult)
Sex: All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes

Inclusion Criteria

Not provided

Exclusion Criteria

Not provided

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Information, Family Outcomes, Reporting, and Management (nFORM)- Post-test at 8 Weeks After Pre-test (Time2)

Time Frame: Post-test (8 weeks after pre-test/Time1)

nFORM survey was developed by Mathematica. Subscales: Depression (4 items; Range: 4-20); Anxiety (2 items; Range: 2-10); Positive conflict management (7 items; Range: 7-28); Negative conflict management (5 items; Rrange: 5-20); Emotional abuse (2 items; Range: 2-8); Conflict management Satisfaction (1 item; Range: 1-3); Relationship quality (5 items; Range:5-20); Time with partner (3 items; Range: 3-12); Relationship Satisfaction (1 item; Range: 1-3); Parenting stress (1 item; Scale range: 1-4); Banking (3 items; Range: 0-3); Difficulty to pay bills (1 item; Scale range: 1 - 4); Relationship Commitment (1 item; Range: 1-4); Budgeting (1 item; Range: 0-1). Range is Scale Range. Higher scores means higher levels on that variable.

Information, Family Outcomes, Reporting, and Management (nFORM)- Baseline/Pretest (Time1)

Time Frame: Pre-test/Baseline (Time 1) (Completed in first workshop session for Intervention Group and int the Intake and Enrollment Meeting for the Control Group)

nFORM survey was developed by Mathematica. Subscales: Depression (4 items; Range: 4-20); Anxiety (2 items; Range: 2-10); Positive conflict management (7 items; Range: 7-28); Negative conflict management (5 items; Rrange: 5-20); Emotional abuse (2 items; Range: 2-8); Conflict management Satisfaction (1 item; Range: 1-3); Relationship quality (5 items; Range:5-20); Time with partner (3 items; Range: 3-12); Relationship Satisfaction (1 item; Range: 1-3); Parenting stress (1 item; Scale range: 1-4); Banking (3 items; Range: 0-3); Difficulty to pay bills (1 item; Scale range: 1 - 4); Relationship Commitment (1 item; Range: 1); Budgeting (1 item; Range: 0-1). Range is Scale Range. Higher scores means higher levels on that variable. The PI and data for this study are no longer available for query. There is no additional information at this time.

Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE) Inventory in Relation to Financial Problems - Baseline/Pre-test (Time1)

Time Frame: Baseline/Pre-test (Time 1) (Completed in first workshop session for Intervention Group and int the Intake and Enrollment Meeting for the Control Group)

The Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE) Inventory was developed by Carver (1997).This is a 28 item self-report instrument that measures the respondent's individual coping strategies. We have repeated the same 28 items but respondents had to answer about coping strategies in relationship to coping with financial issues in particular. The measure has 14 subscales: Self-distraction, active coping, denial, substance use, use of emotional support, use of instrumental support, behavioral disengagement, venting, positive reframing, planning, humor, acceptance, religion, and self-blame. Each subscale has two items. Only totals for each subscale are computed. Total subscale range: 0-6 for each. Higher scores represent more use of the particular coping strategy.

Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE) Inventory in Relation to Financial Problems - Post- Test (Time2)

Time Frame: Post-test (8weeks after pre-test/Time1)

The Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE) Inventory was developed by Carver (1997). This is a 28 item self-report instrument that measures the respondent's individual coping strategies. We have repeated the same 28 items but respondents had to answer about coping strategies in relationship to coping with financial issues in particular. The measure has 14 subscales: Self-distraction, active coping, denial, substance use, use of emotional support, use of instrumental support, behavioral disengagement, venting, positive reframing, planning, humor, acceptance, religion, and self-blame. Each subscale has two items. Only totals for each subscale are computed. Total subscale range: 0-6 for each. Higher scores represent more use of the particular coping strategy.

Information, Family Outcomes, Reporting, and Management (nFORM)- Six-month Follow-up (Time3)

Time Frame: Six-month follow up (six months after post-test/Time2)

nFORM survey was developed by Mathematica.Subscales: Depression (4 items; Range: 4-20); Anxiety (2 items; Range: 2-10); Positive conflict management (7 items; Range: 7-28); Negative conflict management (5 items; Rrange: 5-20); Emotional abuse (2 items; Range: 2-8); Conflict management Satisfaction (1 item; Range: 1-3); Relationship quality (5 items; Range:5-20); Time with partner (3 items; Range: 3-12); Relationship Satisfaction (1 item; Range: 1-3); Parenting stress (1 item; Scale range: 1-4); Banking (3 items; Range: 0-3); Difficulty to pay bills (1 item; Scale range: 1 - 4); Relationship Commitment(1 item; Range: 1-4); Budgeting (1 item; Range: 0-1). Range is Scale Range. Higher scores means higher levels on that variable.

Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE) Inventory- Baseline/Pre-test (Time1)

Time Frame: Baseline/Pre-test (Time 1) (Completed in first workshop session for Intervention Group and int the Intake and Enrollment Meeting for the Control Group)

The Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE) Inventory was developed by Carver (1997)This is a 28 item self-report instrument that measures the respondent's individual coping strategies. The measure has 14 subscales: Self-distraction, active coping, denial, substance use, use of emotional support, use of instrumental support, behavioral disengagement, venting, positive reframing, planning, humor, acceptance, religion, and self-blame. Each subscale has two items. Only totals for each subscale are computed. Total subscale range: 0-6 for each. Higher scores represent more use of the particular coping strategy. The PI and data for this study are no longer available for query. There is no additional information at this time.

Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE) Inventory in Relation to Financial Problems - Six-month Follow-up (Time 3)

Time Frame: Six-month follow up (six months after post-test/Time2)

The Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE) Inventory was developed by Carver (1997). This is a 28 item self-report instrument that measures the respondent's individual coping strategies. We have repeated the same 28 items but respondents had to answer about coping strategies in relationship to coping with financial issues in particular. The measure has 14 subscales: Self-distraction, active coping, denial, substance use, use of emotional support, use of instrumental support, behavioral disengagement, venting, positive reframing, planning, humor, acceptance, religion, and self-blame. Each subscale has two items. Only totals for each subscale are computed. Total subscale range: 0-6 for each. Higher scores represent more use of the particular coping strategy.

Difficulties in Emotion Regulation - Baseline/Pre-test (Time 1)

Time Frame: Baseline/Pre-test (Time 1) (Completed in first workshop session for Intervention Group and int the Intake and Enrollment Meeting for the Control Group)

Developed by Gratz and Roemer (2004). This is a 36-item self-report instrument that measures the respondent difficulties in emotion regulation. Scale range: 36-180. Higher scores represent more difficulties in emotion regulation

Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE) Inventory - Post- Test (Time2)

Time Frame: Post-test (8weeks after pre-test/Time1)

The Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE) Inventory was developed by Carver (1997).This is a 28 item self-report instrument that measures the respondent's individual coping strategies. The measure has 14 subscales: Self-distraction, active coping, denial, substance use, use of emotional support, use of instrumental support, behavioral disengagement, venting, positive reframing, planning, humor, acceptance, religion, and self-blame. Each subscale has two items. Only totals for each subscale are computed. Total subscale range: 0-6 for each. Higher scores represent more use of the particular coping strategy. The PI and data for this study are no longer available for query. There is no additional information at this time.

Family Economic Strain Scale - Baseline/Pre-test (Time 1)

Time Frame: Baseline/Pre-test (Time 1) (Completed in first workshop session for Intervention Group and int the Intake and Enrollment Meeting for the Control Group)

Developed by Hilton and Devall (1997). This is a 15-item self-report instrument that measures the respondent's level of economic strain.As not all couples had children, the two items related to children were excluded. Scale range: 13-65. Higher scores represent higher economic strain

Family Economic Strain Scale - Six-month Follow-up (Time 3)

Time Frame: Six-month follow up (six months after post-test/Time2)

Difficulties in Emotion Regulation - Post-test (Time 2)

Time Frame: Post-test (8weeks after pre-test/Time1)

Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE) Inventory - Six-month Follow-up (Time 3)

Time Frame: Six-month follow up (six months after post-test/Time2)

The Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE) Inventory was developed by Carver (1997).This is a 28 item self-report instrument that measures the respondent's individual coping strategies. The measure has 14 subscales: Self-distraction, active coping, denial, substance use, use of emotional support, use of instrumental support, behavioral disengagement, venting, positive reframing, planning, humor, acceptance, religion, and self-blame. Each subscale has two items. Only totals for each subscale are computed. Total subscale range: 0-6 for each. Higher scores represent more use of the particular coping strategy. The PI and data for this study are no longer available for query. There is no additional information at this time.

Family Economic Strain Scale - Post-test (Time 2)

Time Frame: Post-test (8weeks after pre-test/Time1)

Difficulties in Emotion Regulation - Six-month Follow-up (Time 3)

Time Frame: Six-month follow up (six months after post-test/Time2)

Conflict Tactics Scales-R - Six Month Follow-up (Time 3)

Time Frame: Six-month follow up (six months after post-test/Time2)

Developed by Straus, Comby, Boney-McCoy, \& Sugarman (1996). This 78-item self report instrument measures physical assault (12 items), physical injury (6 items), psychological aggression (8 items), sexual coercion (7 items) and negotiation (6 items) by the respondent and by the partner. Only the physical assault and psychological aggression subscales were considered for analysis in this study. A total prevalence score for each subscale was calculated. Total prevalence scores ranged 0 to 12 for the physical assault subscale and from 0 to 8 for the psychological aggresion subscale. Higher total scores represented higher levels of the variable. For the psychological aggression and physical assault subscales only the partner with the higher score was considered due to underreporting of these behaviors. The PI and data for this study are no longer available for query. There is no additional information at this time.

Conflict Tactics Scales-R Post-test (Time 2)

Time Frame: Post-test (8weeks after pre-test/Time1)

Conflict Tactics Scales-R - Baseline/Pre-test (Time 1)

Time Frame: Baseline/Pre-test (Time 1) (Completed in first workshop session for Intervention Group and int the Intake and Enrollment Meeting for the Control Group)

Dyadic Coping With Economic Stress Inventory - Post-Test (Time 2)

Time Frame: Post-test (8weeks after pre-test/Time1)

This 34-item self-report instrument is an adaptation of the Dyadic Coping Inventory to economic stress and measures how couples cope with economic stress. Only the communication (2 items by self and 2 items by partner), supportive (5 items by self and 5 items by partner), negative (4 items by self and 4 items by partners), and common dyadic coping (5 items) subscales were used in the present study. Response options range from 1 to 5. A total was caculated for each subscale by adding all responses. The total score for stress communication ranged from 2 to 10, supportive from 5 to 25, negative from 4 to 20, and common dyadic coping from 5 to 25. Higher scores mean higher frequency of use of that coping behaviors. The PI and data for this study are no longer available for query. There is no additional information at this time.

The Brief Communication Patterns Questionnaire - General and In Relation to Money Problems - Six-month Follow-up (Time 3)

Time Frame: Six-month follow up (six months after post-test/Time2)

Developed by Futris, Campbell, Nielsen, \& Burwell (2010). This is an 11-item self-report questionnaire that assesses the couple's demand/withdraw communication patterns as well as their level of constructive communication when there is a problem. Each item is responded on a scale from 1 to 9. The Demand/Withdraw Total Scale has 6 items. and the total score for the subscale ranges from 6 to 54 . The constructive communciation subscale includes 3 items and. the total score for the subscale ranges from 3 to 27. Higher scores represent more occurrence of the communication pattern.The same eleven items were asked about communication behaviors in relation to money problems and scored in the same way. The PI and data for this study are no longer available for query. There is no additional information at this time.

Financial Self-Efficacy Scale - Six-month Follow-up (Time 3)

Time Frame: Six-month follow up (six months after post-test/Time2)

Developed by Dietz, Carrozza \& Ritchey (2011). This is a 3-item self-report questionnaire that assesses the respondent's financial self-efficacy. Scale range 4-12. Higher scores represent higher financial self-efficacy

Revised Financial Management Behavior Scale - Six-month Follow-up(Time 3)

Time Frame: Six-month follow up (six months after post-test/Time2)

Developed by Dew and Xiao (2011). This is a 15-item self-report questionnaire that assesses the respondent's financial management behavior. It includes four subscales: Insurance (3 items; scale range: 3-15), Credit management (3 items; scale range: 3-15), Savings (3 items; scale range: 3-15), Cash management (4 items; scale range: 4-20). Higher scores for each of the subscale depict healthy financial management practices. The PI and data for this study are no longer available for query. There is no additional information at this time.

Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale - Stress Subscale Post-test (Time 2)

Time Frame: Post-test (8weeks after pre-test/Time1)

Developed by Lovibond \& Lovibond (1995). The stress subscale has 7 items and scale range is 0-21. Higher scores represent more symptoms of stress

Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale - Stress Subscale Baseline/Pre-test (Time 1)

Time Frame: Baseline/Pre-test (Time 1) (Completed in first workshop session for Intervention Group and int the Intake and Enrollment Meeting for the Control Group)

Developed by Lovibond \& Lovibond (1995). The stress subscale has 7 items and scale range is 0-21. Higher scores represent more symptoms of stress

Dyadic Coping Inventory - Follow-up (Time 3)

Time Frame: Six-month follow up (six months after post-test/Time2)

Developed by Guy Bodenmann (2008). This 37-item self-report instrument measures how couples cope with stress in general. It includes stress communication, supportive dyadic coping, delegated dyadic coping, common dyadic coping, negative dyadic coping, and evaluation of dyadic coping. Only the communication (4 items by self and 4 items by partner), supportive (5 items by self and 5 items by partner), negative (4 items by self and 4 items by partners), and common dyadic coping (5 items) subscales were used in the present study. Response options range from 1 to 5 . Total scores for each subscale were computed. Subscale total scores ranged from 4 to 20 for Stress Communication, 5 to 25 for Supportive, 4 to 20 for Negative, and 5 to 25 for Common Dyadic Coping. Higher scores mean higher frequency of use of that coping behaviors. The PI and data for this study are no longer available for query. There is no additional information at this time.

The Brief Communication Patterns Questionnaire - General and In Relation to Money Problems - Pre-test (Time 1)

Time Frame: Pre-test (Time 1) (Completed in first workshop session for Intervention Group and int the Intake and Enrollment Meeting for the Control Group)

This is an 11-item self-report questionnaire that assesses the couple's demand/withdraw communication patterns as well as their level of constructive communication when there is a problem. Each item is responded on a scale from 1 to 9. The Demand/Withdraw Total Scale has 6 items. and the total score for the subscale ranges from 6 to 54 . The constructive communication subscale includes 3 items and. the total score for the subscale ranges from 3 to 27. Higher scores represent more occurrence of the communication pattern.The same eleven items were asked about communication behaviors in relation to money problems and scored in the same way. The PI and data for this study are no longer available for query. There is no additional information at this time.

Financial Self-Efficacy Scale - Post-test (Time 2)

Time Frame: Post-test (8weeks after pre-test/Time1)

Revised Financial Management Behavior Scale - Post-test (Time 2)

Time Frame: Post-test (8weeks after pre-test/Time1)

Dyadic Coping Inventory - Post-Test (Time 2)

Time Frame: Post-test: 8 weeks after Pre-Test ; Follow-up: 6 months after Post-Test

Dyadic Coping With Economic Stress Inventory - Six-month Follow-up (Time 3)

Time Frame: Six-month follow up (six months after post-test/Time2)

The Brief Communication Patterns Questionnaire - General and In Relation to Money Problems - Post-test (Time 2)

Time Frame: Post-test (8weeks after pre-test/Time1)

Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale - Stress Subscale Six-month Follow up (Time 3)

Time Frame: Six-month follow up (six months after post-test/Time2)

Developed by Lovibond \& Lovibond (1995). The stress subscale has 7 items and scale range is 0-21. Higher scores represent more symptoms of stress

Dyadic Coping Inventory - Baseline/Pre-test (Time 1)

Time Frame: Baseline/Pre-test (Time 1) (Completed in first workshop session for Intervention Group and int the Intake and Enrollment Meeting for the Control Group)

Financial Self-Efficacy Scale - Pre-test (Time 1)

Time Frame: Pre-test (Time1Pre-test (Time 1) (Completed in first workshop session for Intervention Group and int the Intake and Enrollment Meeting for the Control Group)

Financial Services Survey From FINRA - Pre-test (Time 1)

Time Frame: Pre-test (Time 1) (Completed in first workshop session for Intervention Group and int the Intake and Enrollment Meeting for the Control Group)

Developed by FINRA for the National Financial Capability Study. This is a 5-item self-report questionnaire that assesses the respondent's use of financial services. Examples of specific items included "Taken out an auto title loan," "Taken out a short term "payday" loan," and "Used a pawn shop.". The measurement used a 5-point scale, ranging from 1(never) to 5 (4 or more times). Scale ranges from 5-25. Higher sores represent higher use of non-banking borrowing/alternative borrowing methods. The PI and data for this study are no longer available for query. There is no additional information at this time.

Dyadic Coping With Economic Stress Inventory - Baseline/Pre-Test (Time 1)

Time Frame: Baseline/Pre-test (Time 1) (Completed in first workshop session for Intervention Group and int the Intake and Enrollment Meeting for the Control Group)

34-item self-report instrument adapted from the Dyadic Coping Inventory to describe coping with economic stress. It includes stress communication, supportive dyadic coping, delegated dyadic coping, common dyadic coping, negative dyadic coping, and evaluation of dyadic coping. Only the communication (2 items by self and 2 items by partner), supportive (5 items by self and 5 items by partner), negative (4 items by self and 4 items by partners), and common dyadic coping (5 items) subscales were used in the present study. Response options range from 1 to 5. A total was caculated for each subscale by adding all responses. The total score for stress communication ranged from 2 to 10, supportive from 5 to 25, negative from 4 to 20, and common dyadic coping from 5 to 25. Higher scores mean higher frequency of use of that coping behaviors. The PI and data for this study are no longer available for query. There is no additional information at this time.

Revised Financial Management Behavior Scale - Pre-test (Time 1)

Time Frame: Pre-test (Time 1) (Completed in first workshop session for Intervention Group and int the Intake and Enrollment Meeting for the Control Group)

Financial Services Survey From FINRA - Six-month Follow-up (Time 3)

Time Frame: Six-month follow up (six months after post-test/Time2)

Developed by FINRA for the National Financial Capability Study. This is a 5-item self-report questionnaire that assesses the respondent's use of financial services. Examples of specific items included "Taken out an auto title loan," "Taken out a short term "payday" loan," and "Used a pawn shop.". The measurement used a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (4 or more times). Scale ranges from 5-25. Higher sores represent higher use of non-banking borrowing/alternative borrowing methods. The PI and data for this study are no longer available for query. There is no additional information at this time.

Financial Services Survey From FINRA - Post-test (Time 2)

Time Frame: Post-test (8weeks after pre-test/Time1)

Developed by FINRA for the National Financial Capability Study. This is a 5-item self-report questionnaire that assesses the respondent's use of financial services. Examples of specific items included "Taken out an auto title loan," "Taken out a short term "payday" loan," and "Used a pawn shop.". The measurement used a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (4 or more times). Scale ranges from 5-25. Higher sores represent higher use of non-banking borrowing/alternative borrowing methods.

Couple Financial Management Roles and Satisfaction - Post-Test (Time 2)

Time Frame: Post-test (8weeks after pre-test/Time1

Developed by Archuleta (2008). This is a 13-item self-report questionnaire. There are two different 7-point Likert-type scales used for Financial Management Roles (FMR). The first part assesses spousal involvement in specific financial management roles. The scale ranges from 1 (FMR was primarily the participant's responsibility) to 7 (FMR was the spouse's primary responsibility). Scores were recoded (1 recoded to -3; 4 recoded to 0; and 7 recoded to 3). Scale ranges from -39 to 39. Lower score indicates the participant is more responsible and higher score the participant is less responsible for the FMR in his/her household. Second part of the FMR assesses respondents' level of satisfaction of their involvement in financial roles. The scale ranges from 1 (participant unsatisfied in his/her involvement) to 7 (participant satisfied in his/her involvement). Higher score indicates participant's satisfaction of involvement in specific financial role. Scale ranges from 13 to 91.

Shared Goals and Values - Pre-test (Time 1)

Time Frame: Pre-test (Time 1) (Completed in first workshop session for Intervention Group and int the Intake and Enrollment Meeting for the Control Group)

Developed by Archuleta, Grable, \& Britt (2010) . This is a 4-item self-report questionnaire that assesses the respondent's perception of the extent to which he or she share financial goals and values with his/her partner. Scale range: 4-28. Higher scores represent more sharing

Shared Goals and Values - Post-test (Time 2)

Time Frame: Post-test (8weeks after pre-test/Time1)

Developed by Archuleta, Grable, \& Britt (2010) .This is a 4-item self-report questionnaire that assesses the respondent's perception of the extent to which he or she share financial goals and values with his/her partner. Scale range: 4-28. Higher scores represent more sharing

Shared Goals and Values - Six-month Follow-up (Time 3)

Time Frame: Six-month follow up (six months after post-test/Time2)

Developed by Archuleta, Grable, \& Britt (2010) .This is a 4-item self-report questionnaire that assesses the respondent's perception of the extent to which he or she share financial goals and values with his/her partner. Scale range: 4-28. Higher scores represent more sharing

Perceived Employment Barriers - Post--test (Time 2)

Time Frame: Post-test (8weeks after pre-test/Time1)

Developed by Hong (2013). This is a 27-item self-report questionnaire that assesses the respondent's perception of employment barriers. It has the following subscales: Physical and mental health (6 items, scale range: 6-30), Labor Market Exclusion (3 items: scale range: 3 -15), Child Care (3 items: scale range: 3 -15). Human Capital (5 items, scale range: 5-25), and Soft Skills (5 items, scale range: 5-25). Higher scores represent higher/more barriers in that area.

Employment Hope Scale - Post-test (Time 2)

Time Frame: Post-test (8weeks after pre-test/Time1)

Developed by Hong, Sheriff \& Naeger, (2009) This is a 24-item self-report questionnaire that assesses the respondent's psychological readiness and hope for employment. Subscales included in the study are: Utilization Skills (4 items; scale range: 0-40); Self-Worth (4 items; scale range: 0-40); Self-Motivation (4 items; scale range: 0-40); Self-Perceived Capability (4 items; scale range: 0-40); Goal Orientation (4 items; scale range: 0-40); Future Job Outlook (4 items; scale range: 0-40); Psychological Empowerment (combined 12 items; scale range: 0-120); and Moving to Future Goals (combined 12 items; scale range: 0-120). Higher scores represent higher readiness or hope.

Couple Financial Management Roles and Satisfaction - Pre-Test (Time 1)

Time Frame: Pre-test (Time 1) (Completed in first workshop session for Intervention Group and int the Intake and Enrollment Meeting for the Control Group)

There are two different 7-point Likert-type scales used for Financial Management Roles (FMR). The first part assesses spousal involvement in specific financial management roles. The scale ranges from 1 (FMR was primarily the participant's responsibility) to 7 (FMR was the spouse's primary responsibility). Scores were recoded (1 recoded to -3; 4 recoded to 0; and 7 recoded to 3). Scale ranges from -39 to 39. Lower score indicates the participant is more responsible and higher score the participant is less responsible for the FMR in his/her household. Second part of the FMR assesses respondents' level of satisfaction of their involvement in financial roles. The scale ranges from 1 (participant unsatisfied in his/her involvement) to 7 (participant satisfied in his/her involvement). Higher score indicates participant's satisfaction of involvement in specific financial role. Scale ranges from 13 to 91. The PI and data for this study are no longer available for query.

Couple Financial Management Roles and Satisfaction - Six-month Follow-up (Time 3)

Time Frame: Six-month follow up (six months after post-test/Time2)

Perceived Employment Barriers - Pre-test (Time 1)

Time Frame: Pre-test (Time 1) (Completed in first workshop session for Intervention Group and int the Intake and Enrollment Meeting for the Control Group)

Employment Hope Scale - Six-month Follow-up (Time 3)

Time Frame: Six-month follow up (six months after post-test/Time2)

Perceived Employment Barriers - Six-month Follow-up (Time 3)

Time Frame: Six-month follow up (six months after post-test/Time2)

Employment Hope Scale - Pre-test (Time 1)

Time Frame: Pre-test (Time 1) (Completed in first workshop session for Intervention Group and int the Intake and Enrollment Meeting for the Control Group)

Secondary Outcomes

No secondary outcomes reported

Investigators

Sponsor

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Sponsor Class

Other

Responsible Party

Sponsor

Study Sites (6)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials

Completed

Not Applicable

Couples Health Project: Couples-based Intervention to Reduce Drug Use and HIV Transmission RiskRisk BehaviorDrug UseSex, Anal

NCT03386110Hunter College of City University of New York100

Completed

Not Applicable

Partners in Health: A Couples-based Approach to Obesity PreventionObesity

NCT02205281California Polytechnic State University-San Luis Obispo30

Completed

Not Applicable

Duo Partnership Adherence Commitment TherapyHIV/AIDS

NCT02925949University of California, San Francisco288

Recruiting

Not Applicable

Effectiviteit van de 'Houd me Vast' relatieverbeteringscursus voor ouders met jonge kindereRelationship problems

NL-OMON26933one50

Active, not recruiting

Not Applicable

Becoming United in Lifestyle DecisionsOverweight and Obesity

NCT05796141University of Connecticut762