pdf [5.3MB] - Department of Families, Housing, Community Services

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TABLE 3-20: OUTCOME VARIABLES BY RESEARCH QUESTION IN A STUDY OF SSLPSSource: Belsky et al (2006).The effects that emerged from the initial impact evaluation were small but indicated that onaverage, SSLPs appeared to benefit FF. The overall findings of the initial evaluation aresummarised below (NESS 2005): Mothers of 9 month olds were reported to experience less household chaos.90
Mothers of 36 month olds were reported to show more acceptance of their child’sbehaviour (i.e. through less slapping, scolding, physical restraint) when living in SSLPareas, as compared to comparison communities.Non-teenage mothers (86% of mothers) appeared to show less negative parenting.The children from relatively less disadvantaged families (i.e. non-teenage mothers)benefited somewhat from living in SSLP areas, perhaps due to positive effects onparenting.SSLPs seemed to affect only children aged 36 months and effects varied across subpopulations.Some children of non-teenage mothers had fewer behavioural problems, with thereverse true for teenage mothers.Children of teenage mothers, like those in workless and lone parent households,scored lower on verbal ability tests.Nonetheless, as can be seen, the study also demonstrated that children from moredisadvantaged families (i.e. teen mothers, lone parent and workless households) appearedto be adversely affected from living in a SSLP community. Additionally it was reported thatthere was substantial variability in the degree to which SSLPs proved more and lesseffective, with evidence that programs led by health agencies generated greater beneficialoutcomes.The statistical results behind these findings are presented in Table 3-21.TABLE3-21: SSLP ,S AND COMPARISON GROUPS SIGNIFICANT MEAN SCORE DIFFERENCESSource: Belsky et al (2006).91
Page 1 and 2:
June 2009Positive Family Functionin
Page 3 and 4:
3.8 Reconnect......................
Page 5 and 6:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSAccess Economics wo
Page 7 and 8:
NESSNFFNPVPFFPIMTriple-PPUPRCTREACh
Page 9 and 10:
A simple definition of PFF could no
Page 11 and 12:
ehaviour during youth and later in
Page 13 and 14:
Alternatives to such a partnership
Page 15 and 16:
ooCommunities for childrenInvest an
Page 17 and 18:
1. MEANING AND MEASUREMENTWorking d
Page 19 and 20:
Fletcher (2007) presented the New Z
Page 21 and 22:
DomainEmotionalGovernanceEngagement
Page 23 and 24:
ModelTABLE 1-2: THEORETICAL MODELS
Page 25 and 26:
In times of crisis we can turn to e
Page 27 and 28:
2. MEASURING OUTCOMESImpacts from F
Page 29 and 30:
TABLE 2-1: MATERNAL AND PATERNAL IN
Page 31 and 32:
Parental limit setting, family conf
Page 33 and 34:
studied in the literature and separ
Page 35 and 36:
TABLE 2-7: FAMILY RISK FACTORS ASSO
Page 37 and 38:
FIGURE 2-4: PARENTAL INPUTS (AGE TH
Page 39 and 40:
exacerbated by the formation of aff
Page 41 and 42:
Productivity outcomes appear to be
Page 43 and 44:
Danish National Longitudinal Study
Page 45 and 46:
Key research question 14: how the i
Page 47 and 48:
ut could not (until further Waves o
Page 49 and 50:
FIGURE 2-6: LONGITUDINAL PATHWAYS T
Page 51 and 52:
only be useful in providing informa
Page 53 and 54:
FIGURE 2-9: CONCEPTUAL MAP FOR VALU
Page 55 and 56: Productivity losses would best be m
Page 57 and 58: Short term productivity costsThe fr
Page 59 and 60: The expected retirement age by the
Page 61 and 62: (discussed previously in Section 2.
Page 63 and 64: Aids and home modificationsAlthough
Page 65 and 66: The extensive literature in this fi
Page 67 and 68: In discounting healthy life and oth
Page 69 and 70: proximal risk factors are those tha
Page 71 and 72: ages of 18-24 months and between 4
Page 73 and 74: TABLE 3-4: MATERNITY IMMUNISATION A
Page 75 and 76: Family Relationship Centres are a f
Page 77 and 78: Increased contentment in children w
Page 79 and 80: TABLE 3-7: FAMILY DISPUTE RESOLUTIO
Page 81 and 82: 3.3.1 COMMUNITIES FOR CHILDRENProgr
Page 83 and 84: Quantitative and qualitative data w
Page 85 and 86: This initiative developed out of a
Page 87 and 88: FIGURE 3-2: DIAGRAM OF TRIPLE P SYS
Page 89 and 90: TABLE 3-11: RESULTS OF META-ANALYSE
Page 91 and 92: This section on early childhood int
Page 93 and 94: Table 3-14 displays a summary of th
Page 95 and 96: TABLE 3-15: BCR OF ECE PROGRAMSSour
Page 97 and 98: 3.6 PEEL CHILD HEALTH SURVEYThe Pee
Page 99 and 100: Research on efficacy - Evaluation o
Page 101 and 102: Education participation levels rema
Page 103 and 104: For FLW, outcomes assessment was re
Page 105: whether children, families and comm
Page 109 and 110: The effects associated with SSLPs a
Page 111 and 112: social context of the family.Self-r
Page 113 and 114: social and emotional development of
Page 115 and 116: analyses can be broken down further
Page 117 and 118: 4. CONCLUSIONThe method proposed fo
Page 119 and 120: Australian Institute of Family Stud
Page 121 and 122: Duncan J, Bowden C, Smith AB (2005)
Page 123 and 124: Mathers C, Vos T, Stevenson C (1999
Page 125 and 126: Sanders MR (2003) ‘Triple P - Pos
show all

pdf [5.3MB] - Department of Families, Housing, Community Services

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?