Evaluating the My Life self-determination model for older youth in foster care: Establishing efficacy and exploring moderation of response to intervention
Blakeslee, J.E., Powers, L.E., Geenen, S., Schmidt, J., Nelson, M., Fullerton, A., George, K., McHugh, E., & Bryant, M. (2020). Children and Youth Services Review, 119, 105419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105419.
-
examining242Students, gradeAdult
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: December 2022
- Single Study Review (findings for My Life Model (MLM))
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards with reservations because it is a compromised randomized controlled trial, but the analytic intervention and comparison groups satisfy the baseline equivalence requirement.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Researcher-developed self-determination skills assessment: adult support strategies |
My Life Model (MLM) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
1.47 |
1.38 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Researcher-developed self-determination skills assessment: number of available stress management strategies |
My Life Model (MLM) vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Youth without disabilities;
|
3.28 |
2.70 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Career Decision-Making Self-Efficacy (CDSE) |
My Life Model (MLM) vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Youth with disabilities;
|
3.99 |
3.82 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Researcher-developed self-attribution of accomplishments |
My Life Model (MLM) vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Youth with disabilities;
|
3.06 |
2.72 |
No |
-- | ||
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Female: 53%
Male: 47% -
Rural, Suburban, Urban
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Oregon
-
Race Black 16% Native American 7% Other or unknown 31% White 47% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 19% Other or unknown 81% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Other or unknown 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in three Oregon counties in the greater Portland metropolitan area: Clackamas, Multnomah, and Washington. The study settings included urban, suburban, and rural areas. The manuscript does not describe the specific setting in which the intervention was offered.
Study sample
A total of 242 youth in foster care were included in the study. Youth were 16.5 to 18.5 years of age and under the guardianship of Oregon Department of Human Services with at least 90 days in foster care. Approximately 53% of the youth were female and 59% received special education services. Forty-seven percent were White, 16% were Black, 7% were Native American, and 31% were another race or did not report their race. Nineteen percent were Hispanic or Latino.
Intervention Group
The My Life Model (MLM) seeks to promote self-determination and goal achievement among youth in foster care through youth-directed coaching and peer mentoring. Over the course of a year, youth in the program met weekly with their coaches for 60–90 minutes to identify and pursue goals, manage challenges they encounter, and learn skills related to achieving their goals. Examples of activities in these meetings included gathering information, meeting with others, visiting a college, and taking a walk together. Coaches provide experiential support and impart key self-determination skills such as problem solving, negotiation, and stress management. Over time, coaches decrease their support as youth build their own capacity. MLM also consisted of 4-5 mentoring workshops where youth met with young adult mentors formerly in foster care to speak about their lived experiences. The workshops focused on topics identified by the youth and provided an opportunity to learn from peers through engaging and fun activities.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison group received business-as-usual services for foster youth, which typically included special education classes, access to case managers, individualized planning on transition out of foster care, and Individualized Learning Program services.
Support for implementation
Project staff members and graduate students in social work provided coaching. The study did not describe any support or training offered to these providers of the intervention.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).