Lessons Learned on Recruiting and Retaining Young Fathers in a Parenting and Repeat Pregnancy Prevention Program

Abstract

Introduction Research shows that mainstream parenting and repeat pregnancy prevention programs generally do not effectively engage with fathers and that young men’s levels of participation in such services are low. To support practitioners in overcoming the barriers to recruiting and retaining young fathers, the current study aimed to gather lessons learned from one program’s state administrators, case managers, and young fathers about the most effective strategies for engaging this population in intensive case management. Methods Three focus groups were conducted. One focus group was held with the creators and managers of the Michigan Adolescent Pregnancy and Parenting Program MI-APPP at the state Department of Health and Human Services (n = 3). The other two groups were designed to jointly engage young fathers currently involved in intensive case management (n = 11) and their case managers (n = 5). A qualitative analysis of the focus group transcripts was conducted using a coding scheme developed from emerging themes in the transcripts and related literature. Results The findings highlight a selection of those strategies that focus group participants perceived to be most successful in improving male recruitment and retention in intensive ongoing case management. Among these strategies were centralizing feedback from young fathers in program decision making, offering opportunities for young fathers to connect, and challenging staff’s negative stereotypes about young fathers. Discussion Despite the small sample size, the results of this study nevertheless contribute to debates in the field regarding appropriate strategies for engaging young fathers by informing professional practice.

Supporting Expectant and Parenting Teens: New Evidence to Inform Future Programming and Research

“…Similarly, the two programs that demonstrated impacts on teen parents’ outcomes included in this supplement used different approaches to providing one-on-one support: New Heights was a school-based program that included case management (Asheer et al 2020b , this issue) and Healthy Families Healthy Futures enhanced with Steps to Success was based on a home visiting model (Zief et al 2020b , this issue). The other programs described in this supplement provided school- or college-based supports (Aufrichtig et al 2020 , this issue; Askelson et al 2020 , this issue; Amenumey et al 2020 , this issue), provided case management (Asheer et al 2020a this issue; Kang et al 2020 , this issue; Egan et al 2020 , this issue; McGirr et al 2020 , this issue), or focused on systems-level coordination among service providers (Purington et al 2020a , this issue; Workman and Browder 2020 , this issue). Taken together, these studies illustrate that effective programs can use different strategies—there is no one size fits all approach to serving teen parents.…”

“…Programs also needed to provide training to staff serving fathers. For example, ongoing coaching and technical assistance from a male engagement expert and regular in-person or virtual peer-to-peer learning opportunities were provided to support case managers serving young fathers (McGirr et al 2020 , this issue). This training also focused on challenging any of staff’s negative stereotypes about young fathers (McGirr et al 2020 , this issue).…”

“…For example, ongoing coaching and technical assistance from a male engagement expert and regular in-person or virtual peer-to-peer learning opportunities were provided to support case managers serving young fathers (McGirr et al 2020 , this issue). This training also focused on challenging any of staff’s negative stereotypes about young fathers (McGirr et al 2020 , this issue). In general, programs should expect that intensive support and guidance may be required to ensure staff can implement programs with fidelity, particularly when the program is new or still being developed (Pressfield et al 2020 , this issue).…”

“…Again, PAF grantees described multiple strategies for recruiting and engaging young fathers, including recruiting from places that fathers frequent and by word of mouth, providing programming and activities that were welcoming to fathers, connecting fathers to other young fathers, valuing fathers’ feedback, and setting minimum caseloads for serving fathers. First, effective recruitment strategies included recruiting from places that fathers naturally frequent such as gyms, barbershops, and community centers (Niland and Selekman 2020 , this issue) and using word of mouth from other fathers (McGirr et al 2020 , this issue). Second, programs created environments that were welcoming to fathers.…”

“…For example, they featured pictures of men on recruitment materials (McGirr et al 2020 , this issue; Niland and Selekman 2020 , this issue) and provided father-focused activities such as game nights and video games (Niland and Selekman 2020 , this issue). Third, programs connected young fathers to one another, and young fathers reported they enjoyed the opportunity to connect with other young fathers (McGirr et al 2020 , this issue). Fourth, program staff made decisions based on young fathers’ feedback and fathers and case managers believed this contributed to retaining these fathers (McGirr et al 2020 , this issue).…”