A Guide to Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood Programs for Hispanic Couples and Families
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Administration for Children and Families' (ACF) a Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood program aims to provide low-income couples and individuals with the tools needed to form and sustain healthy marriages and relationships, promote father engagement, and increase economic self-sufficiency. 1,2search finds that health promotion programs are most effective when they are culturally appropriate to the population served-when the program design, content, and delivery are responsive to cultural norms. 3Accordingly, ACF has emphasized the importance of developing culturally-sensitive Healthy Marriage and Relationship Education (HMRE) and Responsible Fatherhood (RF) programming for diverse populations.To better understand what HMRE and RF programs are doing to reach and serve Hispanic families, we conducted an extensive review of federally-and non-federally-funded programs serving Hispanic couples and fathers.Based on this review, we developed a program guide summarizing multiple aspects of HMRE and RF programs that target and serve Hispanic populations, including location of the program, target population, and a range of implementation and evaluation factors (see Table 1 andTable 2 for more detail).This guide is accompanied by detailed profiles for each program listed in the guide, and can be used to easily and quickly access information about HMRE and RF programs serving Hispanics.This guide can also can be used to compare and further categorize programs, for example, to review only those programs that are offered in Spanish.We include two categories of programs in the guide: (1) programs that serve a Hispanic majority (50 percent or more of the population served is Hispanic), and (2) programs that have a Hispanic presence (at least 20 percent of the population served is Hispanic).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".