Social & Economic Factors Education Employment Income Family & Social Support Community Safety Search Policies & Programs

Display All Policies & Programs Contribute Content

InsideOut Dad

Health Factors: Family & Social Support
Decision Makers: Government - State
Evidence Rating: Insufficient Evidence
Population Reach: <1% of WI's population
Impact on Disparities: Likely to decrease disparities

Is this program or policy in use in your community? Tell us about it.

Description

InsideOut Dad is a program designed to connect incarcerated fathers to their families and prepare them for release. The program aims to reduce recidivism and strengthen families.

Expected Beneficial Outcomes

Decreased recidivism
Stronger families

Evidence of Effectiveness

There is insufficient evidence to determine whether InsideOut Dad decreases recidivism or strengthens families (CEBC). Available evidence suggests that program participants may improve confidence, knowledge, attitude, and behavior (EDR Group 2011), but these findings have not been replicated.

The National Fatherhood Initiative recommends InsideOut Dad based on its focus on cognitive and behavioral approaches to criminogenic factors (Gosnell 2007). 

Implementation Examples

United States

InsideOut Dad is supported by the National Fatherhood Initiative (NFI). InsideOut Dad has been implemented in 24 states.

Implementation Resources

Fathersource - FatherSOURCE. The fatherhood resource center. Accessed on June 23, 2012
Webpage: https://store.fatherhood.org/default.aspx

Citations - Evidence

CEBC - California Evidence-Based Clearinghouse for Child Welfare (CEBC). Information and resources for child welfare professionals. Accessed on May 1, 2012
Webpage: http://www.cebc4cw.org/search/by-program-name/
EDR Group 2011 - Economic Development Research Group (EDR Group). Assessing the impact of InsideOut Dad on Newark community education centers (CEC) residential reentry center residents - Executive summary. Newark: Rutgers University, School of Public Affairs and Administration; 2011. Accessed on June 20, 2012
Webpage: http://www.fatherhood.org/policymakers/fatherhood-program-evaluations
Gosnell 2007 - Gosnell K. Fathers successfully returning home. Corrections Today. 2007. Accessed on June 19, 2012
Webpage: http://www.aca.org/publications/ctarchives0.asp#april07

Citations - Implementation Examples

NFI - National Fatherhood Initiative. Accessed on June 20, 2012
Webpage: http://www.fatherhood.org/

Comments from Users about this Policy/Program (Cost, Feasibility, Lessons Learned)

No comments

X
 

Health Factors

Health Behaviors
Tobacco Use
Diet & Exercise
Alcohol Use
Sexual Activity
 Clinical Care
Access to Care
Quality of Care
 Social & Economic Factors
Education
Employment
Income
Family & Social Support
Community Safety
 Physical Environment
Environmental Quality
Built Environment

Decision Makers

Businesses & Employers
Community Organizations
Government - Local
Government - State
Government - Federal
Healthcare Organizations
Individuals
Schools

Evidence Rating

Level of effectiveness based on a scan of academic literature and key recommendations of leading organizations.

  • Scientifically Supported Numerous studies or systematic review(s) with positive results
  • Some Evidence Research suggests positive impacts; further study may be warranted
  • Expert Opinion Recommended by credible groups*; research evidence limited
  • Insufficient Evidence Evidence limited or unavailable; further study warranted
  • Mixed Evidence Evidence mixed; further study warranted
  • Evidence of Ineffectiveness Research consistently shows program is detrimental or has no effect

Although many policies and programs are recommended by credible groups, we apply the rating ‘expert opinion’ only when policies are recommended but limited scientific evidence of effectiveness is available.

* The American Heritage Dictionary defines credible as 'capable of being believed; plausible.' and 'worthy of confidence; reliable.' To be considered an 'expert recommendation,' policies and programs must be recommended by one or more organizations that are recognized for their impartial expertise in the area of interest and have limited evidence available.

Potential Population Reach

Portion of Wisconsin's population likely to be reached by a policy or program if implemented statewide, based on its characteristics (e.g., target population(s), geographic limitations, and potential implementers).

<1%   20-49%
1-9%   50-99%
10-19%   100%

Potential Population Reach

Portion of Wisconsin's population likely to be reached by a policy or program if implemented statewide, based on its characteristics (e.g., target population(s), geographic limitations, and potential implementers).

<1%   20-49%
1-9%   50-99%
10-19%   100%

Potential Impact on Health Disparities

Likely impact of a given policy or program on racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, geographic or other disparities in Wisconsin based on its characteristics (e.g., target audience, mode of delivery, etc.) and best available evidence related to disparities.

  • Likely to decrease disparities
  • No impact on disparities likely
  • Likely to increase disparities