Age range

Contact information:
Hamilton County Family and Children First Council
125 East Court Street, Suite 350 Cincinnati, OH 45202-1201

Website: http://www.hamilton-co.org/hcfcfc/

Mission/Goals: The CF Plan has four priorities: to reduce the number of high school drop-outs, the number of suspensions and expulsions, and the number of abused and neglected children, and to increase school connectedness.

Notes: For a list of CF Plan coordinators in each of the participating schools, visit
http://www.hamilton-co.org/hcfcfc/
In 2003, there were 402 CF Plan programs delivered in 12 schools. CF Plan provides the following core services: abstinence programs, alcohol/substance abuse programs, anger management programs, alternative-to-suspension programs, bereavement groups/grief counseling, conflict resolution, family resource centers, health care services, mental health services, nutrition programs, open house with service providers, parent involvement programs,
reading programs, social skills training, and tutoring programs.

Source: http://www.hamilton-co.org/hcfcfc/

Type of Evaluation: Quasi-Experimental.

Objective: To measure whether participants improved in the program's 4 objectives.

Impact/Outcome Findings: There was a statistically significant increase in parent involvement between years four and six (no comparison group was possible for parent involvement). For truancy, there was a positive intervention effect for Gamble, Douglass, St. B/EP JH, Elmwood place, and St. Bernard Elementary. Aiken, Sharpsburg, and Quebeq Heights reported higher truancy rates than their comparison schools. Douglass, Elmwood Place, and St. Bernard Elementary experienced positive intervention effects regarding suspensions, NMS had non-significant improvement, and Schwab, Aiken, St.B/EP JH and Quebec Heights had negative intervention effects. Gamble had a positive intervention effect for expulsions and Schwab, Allison, and NMS decreased expulsion rates over time. Quebec Heights had a negative intervention effect and the remaining schools either did not change over time or had insufficient data. Regarding school connectedness (in high schools), no intervention effects were found for at Aiken or Gamble. Aiken’s school connectedness score did significantly improve between years five and six while the comparison school’s score worsened. For school bonding (4th and 5th grade in years 4 through 6), there was no intervention effect between year 4 and 5. Allison school did have a statistically significant improvement and Elmwood Place had a non-significant positive trend. Vine’s connectedness score significantly improved and St.B/EP JS remained stable. NMS increased significantly, but was not different from its comparison school. There was no intervention effect for Quebeq Heights and Douglass.  For high school drop out rates, Aiken reported a decrease in the number of dropouts over six years (from 23.7% in year one to 10.3% in year six). The intervention effect was negative, however, because the comparison school improved at a faster rate down from 27.2% in year one to 7.6% in year six. In Cycle 2 schools, there was no improvement. There was no improvement in the Cycle 1 neighborhoods in the area of abuse and neglect. The proportion of low and greater than low risk cases declined proportionately over time, with declines mirroring declines in the county and the nation as a whole.