Transcript PPT - Clearinghouse for Military Family Readiness

Clearinghouse:
What Are We About ?
• 2.7 million service members (1.4 - AD, 1.3
NG & R) less than 1% of U.S. Population
• 72% ages 18-30 (AD Only)
• 57% Married
• 37% with children; 7% single parents
• ~2 million military children
• 37% of AD live on the installation
• Military Families demonstrate strength and resiliency in the face
of stress and adversity.
• Stress: Frequent transitions and high operation tempo.
• Multiple deployments have direct and indirect (through nondeployed parental health and well-being) negative effects on
families.
– Increased internalizing & externalizing problems at home & school.
– Marital & relationship strain.
• Financial stress, especially for National Guard & Reserve.
• Access and consistency of supports and services.
• Reintegration and adjustment.
– “Invisible injuries” (PTSD &TBI)
 Prepared to effectively navigate the
challenges of daily living experienced in
the unique context of military service;
 Equipped with the skills to competently
function in the face of challenges;
 Awareness of the supportive resources
available; and
 Able to utilize these skills and resources in
managing challenges.
What is Family Readiness?
 Prepared to effectively navigate the challenges of
daily living experienced in the unique context of
military service;
 Equipped with the skills to competently function
in the face of challenges;
 Awareness of the supportive resources
available; and
 Able to utilize these skills and resources in
managing challenges.
Clearinghouse for Military Family Readiness
MC&FP
NIFA
Air
Force
Cooperative
Extension
Land Grant
University
Army
Navy &
Marines
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
OFFICE OF UNDERSECRETARY OF DEFENSE
(MILITARY COMMUNITY & FAMILY POLICY and
RESERVE AFFAIRS)
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF
FOOD & AGRICULTURE
PARTICIPATING
INSTITUTIONS
PURDUE UNIVERSITY
(OVERALL LEADERSHIP, SUB
AWARDS* & INTERNSHIP
PROGRAM)
NEW COMPETITIVE RFA
(CHILD CARE CURRICULUM
DEVELOPMENT)
KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY
(MILITARY ACADEMIC ADVANCEMENT PROGRAM
& CHILD/YOUTH DEPLOYMENT SUPPORT)
UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA
(COMMUNITY CAPACITY
BUILDING)
NORTH CAROLINA STATE
UNIVERSITY
(YOUTH EXTENSION SERVICE
- PROJECT Y.E.S)
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
(MILITARY R.E.A.C.H. &
MILITARY FAMILY READINESS
SYSTEM)
CORNELL UNIVERSITY
(EFMP BENCHMARK STUDY)
OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY
(CHILD DEVELOPMENT
VIRTUAL LAB SCHOOL,
AUTISM PROJECT – PHASE III)
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN
(CHILD CARE TRAINING &
TECH ASSISTANCE)
WEST VIRGINIA
UNIVERSITY
(MEDICAID PROJECT)
eXtension
(MILITARY FAMILIES
LEARNING NETWORK)
PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY
(CLEARINGHOUSE FOR MILITARY
FAMILY READINESS & SUPPORT FOR
MILITARY STUDENTS DURING
PARENTAL ABSENCE)
GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY
(SECOND LANGUAGE AND CULTURE
EXPOSURE FOR CHILDREN & YOUTH)
* SUB-AWARDS THROUGH PURDUE UNIVERSITY INCLUDE PROJECTS FOCUSED ON ADVENTURE CAMPS (11 STATES AND GERMANY), DATABASE
REPORT AND PROGRAM EVALUATION
The Military Family Research Initiative
began in 2009 with funds from the
OVPR and SSRI.
Penn State President
Dr. Rodney Erickson
Penn State VP Research
Dr. Neil Sharkey
Social Science Research
Institute
Dr. Susan McHale
Dr. Keith Aronson
Dr. Doug Teti
Military Family Research
Initiative
Dr. Keith Aronson
Dr. Daniel Perkins
Clearinghouse for
Military Family Readiness
Dr. Daniel Perkins
Dr. Keith Aronson
To foster and support interdisciplinary
applied research and evaluation,
translational and implementation science,
and outreach efforts that advances the
health and well-being of Military service
members and their families.
1. Conduct high-quality, innovative applied research.
2. Increase the speed with which research innovation &
translation in evidence-based or evidenced-informed
practices & programming.
3. Encourage new applied research and outreach focused
on military families.
4. Develop a new generation of researchers,
implementation & evaluation scientists specializing
within a Military context.
5. Provide action-oriented information to improve public
understanding of Military families.
www.militaryfamilies.psu.edu
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Resource Center for Obesity Prevention (DoD)
Continuum of Evidence Project (DoD)
Implementation Technical Assistance (DoD)
Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program (RA)
Navy Youth Sports & Fitness Project (Navy)
Family Readiness Program Evaluation Plan Development Project (DoD)
Air Force Family Advocacy Research Project (AF)
Supporting Military Families During Parental Absence (DoDEA)
USMC Study: The Impact of Suicide on Marine Families (Navy)
Exceptional Family Member Program Providers Study (DoD)
Parenting Across the Lifespan (DoD)
Family Advocacy Program Severity Scale Research Project (DoD)
Evaluation of Army Family Readiness Programs (Army; Pending)
•
Alcohol Brief Counseling Program
 Refinement of Program and Development of
Computer-based Training
•
The Wilford Hall Repository Project
 Empirically-based Treatments for PTSD
•
Promoting Help-seeking for Mental
Health
 A Translational Outreach Effort
• Facilitate multidisciplinary teams of researchers to address critical issues
facing military families.
– Facilitate potential collaborative relationships with military entities
(e.g., Department of Defense and the Services).
– Work with PSU researchers to provide financial support (SSRI Level I
& II) to catalyze new applied research.
– Identify opportunities for applied research funding.
– Increase access to military research participants.
– Enhance faculty and students understanding of military culture.
• Collaborate with Military partners to develop engaged learning
opportunities for students
• Lesson Learned: Funding with DoD and the
Services are not Contracts rather
Partnerships that require time to build trusted
relationships.
 It is iterative, participatory decision-making about APPLIED research
that has concrete deliverables (e.g., literature reviews with specific
recommendations based on best evidence possible; and tools for
practitioners).
 First actions focus on partner’s needs and goals (and finding the
nuggets of scholarship).
 Partners are better at reacting rather than creating – expect an
evolutionary process.
Susan McHale
Karen Bierman
Keith Aronson
Jen DiNallo
Mark Greenberg
Sandee Kyler
Claudia Mincemoyer
Ron Madrid
Robert Nix
Welsh
Sherry Yocum
Clearinghouse Staff
Janet