This Campbell systematic review sought to answer the following questions with the available high quality experimental studies of programs that combined academic programming with other activities such as youth development or recreation: To what extent and in what ways does access to after‐school programs impact student context (i.e., student location, supervision, and safety), participation in enriching activities, behaviors, social and emotional development, and academic outcomes for youth? Do the effects of after‐school programs vary among subgroups of youth defined by their baseline characteristics? Among the program models and settings evaluated, do some seem more beneficial to youth than others? What are the distinguishing characteristics of those more and less successful programs? This review only included well‐implemented experimental design studies. An extensive search of the literature uncovered only five studies that met the inclusion criteria for this review. The five evaluated programs were fairly homogenous along many dimensions, including their target populations and settings–primarily elementary youth living in lower‐ income, urban settings. Notably, looking across the 97 impacts measured by the five studies included in this review reveals primarily null findings–84 percent showed no significant differences between the program and control youth. Also, not one of these studies reported impacts for parents. In this era of welfare reform, it might be important to understand how this type of intervention targeting low‐income youth may impact parents' job attendance and retention or parental levels of stress while balancing the demands of work and child care. Such parental outcomes could arguably mediate student social and emotional, behavioral, and academic outcomes.

Introduction Expectant and parenting teens experience many challenges to achieving self-sufficiency and promoting their children's healthy development. Teen parents need support to help them address these challenges, and many different types of programs aim to support them. In this systematic review, we examine the research about programs that aim to support aspects of teen parents' self-sufficiency by promoting their educational outcomes and healthy birth spacing. Methods We conducted a comprehensive literature search of published and unpublished literature to identify studies of programs to support teen parents that met this review's eligibility criteria. The quality and execution of the eligible study research designs were assessed to determine whether studies' findings were at risk of bias. We then extracted information about study characteristics, outcomes, and program characteristics for studies considered to provide rigorous evidence. Results We identified 58 eligible studies. Twenty-three studies were considered to provide rigorous evidence about either education, contraceptive use, or repeat pregnancy or birth. Seventeen of these studies showed at least one favorable effect on an outcome in one of these domains, whereas the other six did not show any significant or substantial effects in these domains. These 17 studies represent 14 effective programs. Discussion Effective programs to support expectant and parenting teens have diverse characteristics, indicating there is no single approach for promoting teens' education and healthy birth spacing. More rigorous studies of programs to support teen parents are needed to understand more about how to support teen fathers and the program characteristics associated with effectiveness.

Purpose This article uses an evaluation of New Heights, a school-based program for pregnant and parenting teens in the District of Columbia Public Schools, to illustrate how maternal and child health programs can obtain rigorous evaluations at reasonable cost using extant administrative data. The key purpose of the article is to draw out lessons learned about planning and conducting this type of evaluation, including the important role of partnerships between program staff and evaluators. Description This article summarizes the evaluation’s research design, data sources, and lessons learned about ingredients contributing to the successful implementation of this study. The evaluation employed a difference-in-differences design to estimate program impacts using administrative data merged across agencies. Assessment Several features of New Heights and its context facilitated an evaluation. First, New Heights leaders could clearly describe program components and how the program was expected to improve specific student education outcomes. These outcomes were easy to measure for program and comparison groups using administrative data, which agencies were willing to provide. Second, buy-in from program staff facilitated study approval, data agreements, and unanticipated opportunities to learn about program implementation. Finally, time spent by evaluators and program staff in conversation about the program’s components, context, and data resulted in greater understanding and a more useful evaluation. Conclusion The New Heights evaluation is a concrete example of how a small program with a modest evaluation budget can obtain evidence of impact. Collaborative relationships between researchers and program staff can enable these informative studies to flourish.