250 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

JUDY L. POSTMUS, ANDREA HETLING, AND

GRETCHEN L. HOGE

Evaluating a Financial Education Curriculum

as an Intervention to Improve Financial Behaviors
and Financial Well-Being of Survivors of Domestic
Violence: Results from a Longitudinal Randomized
Controlled Study
The Allstate Foundation and the National Network to End Domestic
Violence created a financial education curriculum to improve individ-
ual financial management skills and, ultimately, to improve domestic
violence survivors’ financial well-being. This study, guided by the rea-
soned action approach, evaluates their curriculum using a longitudinal
randomized control study, with data collected over four time periods
spanning 14 months. The analyses demonstrated that the treatment
group had an average improvement between a half point to over a
full point on self-reported financial knowledge, financial intentions,
and financial behavior and a decrease in financial strain. Moreover,
the impact of the curriculum persisted over time. The notable and
lasting impact of participation in the curriculum for this study sample
has critical implications for other agencies serving domestic violence
survivors as well as other programs aimed at improving financial
well-being among their clientele.

Financial education programs that increase consumer knowledge about

financial management skills have garnered greater attention, especially
in times of economic crisis and distress for individuals, families, orga-
nizations, and communities (Gudmunson and Danes 2011). Most of the
existing financial education programs were launched in the late 1990s and
early 2000s with a variety of institutions (e.g., community organizations,
cooperative extension services, businesses, and community colleges) tar-
geting specific populations (e.g., women, welfare recipients, low-income
Judy L. Postmus (postmus@ssw.rutgers.edu) is an Associate Professor & Director, Center on
Violence Against Women & Children, Rutgers University. Andrea Hetling (ahetling@ejb.rutgers.edu)
is an Associate Professor, Rutgers University. Gretchen L. Hoge (ghoge@ssw.rutgers.edu) is a Doctoral
Candidate, Center on Violence Against Women & Children, Rutgers University. This project was
supported by The Allstate Foundation, Economics Against Abuse Program. Points of view in this
document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies
of The Allstate Foundation.

The Journal of Consumer Affairs, Spring 2015: 250–266

DOI: 10.1111/joca.12057
Copyright 2014 by The American Council on Consumer Interests
SPRING 2015 VOLUME 49, NUMBER 1 251

families, adolescents, college students, and persons of color) (Vitt et al.

2000). While most of these programs conducted consumer satisfaction
evaluations, very few had the resources or inclination to conduct rigor-
ous evaluations (Braunstein and Welch 2002; Collins 2012; Collins and
O’Rourke 2010; GAO 2012; Lusardi and Mitchell 2007). Even studies
designed to evaluate impact had challenges with measurements that appro-
priately captured the specific construct of financial knowledge and behav-
iors. Moreover, most lacked a conceptual framework to guide the variables
measured in the studies, compromising the relevance of studies in terms of
identifying specific mechanisms and best practices.
Women are one such specific population at risk for experiencing sit-
uations that leave them in worse financial shape (Fonseca et al. 2012;
Tamborini, Iams, and Reznik 2011). Such situations may include lower
earnings in the workplace, divorce, or outliving their spouse (Fonseca
et al. 2012). Domestic violence also creates situations in which women
may feel economically dependent on the abuser and trapped in the rela-
tionship (Borden et al. 2007; Sanders and Schnabel 2006; Zorza 1991).
Research and practice in the field have identified abusive strategies to
include physical and sexual assault, psychological badgering, emotional
blackmail, isolation tactics, and threats to harm the children in an effort to
coercively control an intimate partner (Stark 2007). Recent attention has
been given by researchers to exploring economic abuse strategies abusers
may also utilize to control their partner. Such strategies may include
economic exploitation and economically controlling behaviors as well as
employment sabotage (Adams et al. 2008; Postmus, Plummer, McMahon,
Murshid, and Kim 2012). For example, the abuser may discourage or
prevent her from working, harass and disrupt her at work, purposively ruin
her credit score, demand to know how money was spent, spend money that
was designated for bills, or make important financial decisions without
seeking input from his partner (Adams et al. 2008; Postmus et al. 2012
Raphael 1999; Tolman and Rosen 2001).
With survivors identified as a population at risk for financial challenges,
several nonprofit domestic violence organizations developed financial
education programs to improve individual financial management skills
and ultimately, to improve survivors’ financial well-being. These financial
educational programs included key topics on basic financial management
skills, such as saving, budgeting, getting or repairing credit, cash flow man-
agement, purchasing a home, predatory lending practices, financing major
purchases, investing, and wise spending habits—all topics considered
key dimensions of a successful financial management education program
(Vitt et al. 2000). In addition, these programs included information on
252 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

economic abuse and how to create economic safety plans that included
how to disentangle joint financial relationships with an abusive partner
or how to identify community-based resources to assist with financial
safety challenges (Postmus 2010). Such attention given to this at-risk
population seeking services at domestic violence organizations provides
a key moment for improving their financial well-being as these survivors
explore how to live independently from their abusers.
Similar to other financial education programs, limited rigorous eval-
uations of these programs for domestic violence survivors exist. One
program, the Redevelopment Opportunities for Women’s Economic
Action Program (REAP), was evaluated in 2001 using randomly assigned
domestic violence organizations (Sanders, Weaver, and Schnabel 2007). A
total of 67 survivors completed a pre-test and a post-test two weeks follow-
ing the implementation of the curriculum. Results indicated that survivors
who participated in REAP showed greater and significant differences in
their knowledge when compared to survivors who did not participate in
REAP (Sanders, Weaver, and Schnabel 2007). Though using randomly
assigned groups, this study had a small sample size and conducted only
one post-test following the implementation of the curriculum.
The Allstate Foundation, in partnership with the National Network
to End Domestic Violence (NNEDV), also created a financial educa-
tion program for domestic violence survivors called “Moving Ahead
Through Financial Management.” This curriculum was developed based
on comprehensive research of similar financial literacy programs for
domestic violence survivors and other at-risk populations. In addition, an
exploratory study of an earlier version of this program was piloted in sev-
eral states; the curriculum was further modified prior to its implementation
(Postmus and Plummer 2010).
The final version of this financial education curriculum contains five
modules, including: (1) understanding financial abuse, (2) learning finan-
cial fundamentals, (3) mastering credit basics, (4) building financial
foundations, and (5) creating budget strategies. There are three objec-
tives of this program. The first overall objective is for participants to
learn the basic vocabulary and knowledge with regard to money, credit,
and financial management. The second objective is for participants to
understand basic financial processes including loan applications, filing
for bankruptcy, running a credit score, and filling out the accompanying
financial paperwork. The last objective of the curriculum is specifically
geared toward the needs of domestic violence survivors and includes
information survivors would need to leave an abusive relationship. The
topics incorporated material on disentangling joint financial relationships
SPRING 2015 VOLUME 49, NUMBER 1 253

and repairing credit damaged by an abuser, locating safety and financial

resources, and forming economic safety plans and strategies to protect
them against their abuser.1 The five modules in the curriculum provide the
information to the staff to cover in these sessions; however, the material
is not proscribed as to how long each module takes or how to present the
materials. Such openness allows agencies the flexibility in how to deliver
the materials based on their clients and schedule. During the “Training
of Trainers” provided by NNEDV, staffs are encouraged to provide group
and individual sessions when covering the material.
The study presented in this article evaluates this curriculum through
the use of a longitudinal, randomized study that is guided by the reasoned
action approach (RAA), a manifestation of the Theory of Planned Behav-
ior (Fishbein and Ajzen 2010). Created through social psychology, RAA
is a theory that guides prediction and explanation of individual behavior.
It has been tested in over 1,000 empirical studies on topics ranging from
alcohol behavior and job performance to condom use and interpersonal
violence (Fishbein and Ajzen 2010). RAA suggests that there are various
factors that influence one’s change in behavior. These factors include
one’s attitudes or knowledge as well as one’s intentions to change or
perform a specific behavior. Most believe that if you provide information
to someone, e.g., around financial management skills, he/she would take
that information and change poor financial behaviors. What is missing,
according to RAA, is an understanding of the individual’s intentions to
perform the behavior. Other factors that may influence behavior include
(1) norms or beliefs about performing a specific behavior from peers or
family of origin, (2) having the ability or the skills necessary to perform
the behavior, and (3) one’s confidence or self-efficacy in performing the
behavior (Fishbein and Ajzen 2010).
An evaluation of a financial education program that applies the RAA
frame would need to examine if the financial education program changes
participants’ knowledge, behavior, and intention to perform the behavior.
In addition, evaluations should include financial well-being variables such
as a decrease in financial stress. Hence, the hypotheses for this study
include the following: Domestic violence survivors who attend classes
on the “Moving Ahead Through Financial Management” curriculum,
when compared to survivors who have not attended classes, will show
greater improvements over time in (1) their financial knowledge; (2) their

1. More information about the financial literacy program, including detailed descriptions of each
curriculum module can be found here: http://www.clicktoempower.org/financial-tools/curriculum-
download.aspx.
254 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

intentions to perform financial behaviors; and (3) their financial behaviors.

Survivors who received the curriculum will also show a decrease over
time in their financial stress.
METHODS

The financial education curriculum was evaluated using a longitudi-

nal randomized control study, with data collected over four time periods
spanning 14 months. Face-to-face interviews were conducted prior to the
implementation of the financial education curriculum, and served as base-
line data. The data were recorded using SNAP software, an online survey
tool. After completing a baseline interview, participants were randomly
assigned within each agency to a treatment group who received the curricu-
lum or to a control group who did not. Post-test interviews were conducted
after approximately two months, eight months, and 14 months. Study par-
ticipants were recruited from 14 different advocacy organizations located
in seven different states and Puerto Rico. Advocates in these agencies
distributed flyers to female survivors in order to provide them with infor-
mation about the study. Participant eligibility criteria included: (1) must
be female over the age of 18, (2) must have experienced some form of
domestic violence (i.e., physical, psychological, sexual, or economic) at
least once in the previous year, (3) have not attended a financial education
class within the past two years, (4) are committed to attend the curricu-
lum group if selected, and (5) are committed to participate in the research
project whether or not they are selected for the curriculum group.
Participating domestic violence agencies included both shelters and
nonresidential programs. NNEDV trained the staff from the agencies
on the curriculum, and then the researchers instructed them to provide
between four to eight group classes and at least one individual session in a
two-month period. These instructions were developed in collaboration with
several staff who had several years of experience teaching this curriculum
to survivors. To achieve fidelity in the implementation of the curriculum
and to allow for flexibility for the programs, the researchers instructed
the staff to complete a checklist to ensure that all topics were covered.
Participants were given a twenty dollar incentive for completing the Time
1 interview (hereafter T1), twenty-five dollars at Time 2 (hereafter T2),
thirty dollars at Time 3 (T3), and forty dollars at Time 4 (T4).
Sample

At T1, 457 women participated in the interviews, 300 women at T2,

279 at T3, and 245 at T4. The number of participants in each study
SPRING 2015 VOLUME 49, NUMBER 1 255

group (control and treatment) remained fairly even in all time periods.
One hundred and sixteen women (25 percent), who only completed the
first interview, were dropped from the project. Women were dropped for
various reasons, including: the agency did not provide the curriculum to
the treatment group; the agency provided the curriculum to the control
group; the participant did not complete the curriculum; the researcher was
not able to get in contact with the participant; and the participant did not
want to continue in the project. Considering the remaining 75 percent of
the sample (n = 341), 15 percent of the women completed two interviews,
28 percent completed three interviews, and close to half (n =195, 57%)
completed all four interviews. This article focuses on the group of 195
women who completed all four interviews (treatment group, n = 94; control
group, n = 101). By limiting this analysis to women in this longitudinal
sample, we are able to show a very detailed picture of the impact of the
curriculum over time.
Participants from the longitudinal sample (n = 195) represent 13 of
the 14 agencies from seven states (New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island,
Connecticut, Texas, Wisconsin, and Iowa) and Puerto Rico. They ranged
in age from 21 to 62 years with an average age of 38. Sixty percent of the
participants identified themselves as Latina or Hispanic; over 20 percent
identified as black, non-Hispanic. Over 14 percent identified themselves
as White, non-Hispanic. Less than 5 percent identified themselves as
“other” (i.e., Asian, Multi-ethnic). Of the 195 participants, over 45 percent
answered “no” when asked if they were born in the United States; over
87 percent of those immigrants (n = 77) had lived in the United States
for five years or more. Over half of the participants (51.3 percent) were
not working; most participants (86 percent) were not in school. Over
82 percent of the participants were financially responsible for children,
with most of the participants responsible for three children or less. In
addition, most of the participants (85.1 percent) made less than $25,000
in the past year for their entire household. Finally, the sample had an
average of almost 12 years of education with almost 45 percent reporting
post-high school education. Please see Table 1 for a description of the
sample. The data are divided by group membership (i.e., treatment or
control).
To understand the difference between the participants who completed
all four interviews (n = 195) and those that did not (n = 262), a number of
statistical tests were run on the variables discussed earlier. The results indi-
cated that individuals who completed all four interviews (n = 195) were
older by about two years. There was also a statistically significant differ-
ence among ethnic groups. A higher percentage of women that identified
256 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

TABLE 1
Demographic Characteristics of the Sample

Percentage or Mean
Full sample Treatment Control
Variables (n = 195) (n = 94) (n = 101)

Age [mean (SD)] 37.5(8.85) 37.4(9.18) 37.7(8.57)

Ethnicity
Hispanic/Latina 60 62.8 57.4
Black or African American 21 18.1 23.8
White, Non-Hispanic 14.4 13.8 14.9
Other 4.6 5.3 4.0
Immigrant to the United States 45.1 50.0 40.6
If immigrant, time lived in the United States
Less than 1 year 2.2 2.1 2.4
1 year to less than 5 years 10.2 8.5 12.2
5 years to less than 10 years 18.1 19.1 17.1
10 years or more 69.3 70.2 68.3
Employment
Unemployed 51.3 45.2 56.4
Part time 25.1 29.0 21.8
Full time 23.6 25.8 21.8
Currently in school 13.9 18.1 10.0
Years of education [mean (SD)] 11.72(3.76) 11.4(3.94) 12.0(3.56)
1–8 years 15.7 18.1 13.2
9–12 years 39.7 39.3 39.7
13–16 years 37.9 34.0 41.8
17–20 years 6.7 8.6 5.1
Annual income
$0–$10,000 44.1 42.6 46.0
$10,001–$15,000 27.7 24.5 31.0
$15,001–$25,000 13.3 14.9 12.0
$25,001–$35,000 7.2 9.6 5.0
More than $35,000 7.2 8.5 6.0
Marital status
Married 15.9 12.8 18.8
Civil union/partnership 3.1 4.3 2.0
Separated 30.8 36.2 25.7
Divorced 19.5 19.1 19.8
Widowed 0.5 0.0 1.0
Single (includes dating) 30.3 27.7 32.7
Financially responsible for children 82.1 79.8 84.2
One child 24.1 26.7 31.8
Two children 27.2 32.0 34.1
Three children 19.5 24.0 23.5
More than three children (4–15) 11.2 17.3 10.6

as “Latinas” and a lower proportion of those identifying as “other” com-

pleted all four interviews compared to those that completed between one
and three interviews. No other significant differences between the groups
were found in any other variables including all of the financial variables.
SPRING 2015 VOLUME 49, NUMBER 1 257

Measurements

The survey instrument consisted of numerous validated or revised scales

as well as demographic questions. The scales used in this article include
financial knowledge, financial intentions, financial behaviors, and financial
stress. These scales were chosen to represent the variables outlined by
the RAA.

Financial Knowledge
The Financial Knowledge scale was designed to measure an individual’s
perceived financial knowledge and is based on a similar scale created and
tested with a different population of domestic violence survivors learning
the “Moving Ahead Through Financial Management” curriculum (Post-
mus, Hetling, and Hoge 2013). Four items were added to the original 13
items to reflect the full content of the financial education curriculum. Based
on an exploratory factor analysis, two of the 17 items were dropped, leaving
a 15-item scale (𝛼 = .896). The response categories for the questions used
a 1–5 scale that ranged from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree).

Financial Intentions
The Financial Intentions scale (and subsequent Financial Behaviors
scale) was created by the researchers for this study as one variable compris-
ing the RAA as outlined in the literature review. Items for this scale were
derived from the literature and from the behaviors addressed in the curricu-
lum (Postmus et al. 2013). Financial intentions were measured by asking
the respondents 14 questions regarding their financial intentions or motiva-
tion to perform a particular financial behavior in the upcoming month. For
example, participants were asked “How likely are you in the next month to
pay your bills on time?” and “How likely are you in the next month to fol-
low a weekly or monthly budget?” Response options ranged from 1 (Never)
to 5 (Always). After performing an exploratory factor analysis, four items
were removed, leaving 10 items (𝛼 = .801).

Financial Behavior
The Financial Behavior scale was also created by the researchers based
on financial behaviors identified in the literature and those that were
addressed in the curriculum (Postmus et al. 2013). Financial behaviors
were measured by asking the respondents the same 14 questions asked in
the Financial Intentions scale; however, this scale asked participants about
their financial behaviors in the past month. For example, participants were
asked “How often in the last month did you pay your bills on time?” and
258 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

“How often in the last month did you follow a weekly or monthly budget?”
Response options ranged from 1 (Never) to 5 (Always). After performing
an exploratory factor analysis, four items were removed, leaving the final
10 items (𝛼 = .804).

Financial Stress
The Financial Strain Survey (Aldana and Liljenquist 1998) is an 18-item
scale that measures different areas of financial strain. Participants were
asked to indicate how often the items applied to them over the past
12 months. Participants indicated such frequency using a 5-point scale
with answers ranging from 1 (Never) to 5 (Always). In this sample of
female domestic violence survivors, the survey demonstrated high internal
reliability (𝛼 = .798). Item numbers 1, 2, 3, and 15 were recoded as they
were negatively worded items.

Data Analysis

Repeated Measures Analysis of Variance (RM-ANOVA) was conducted

in the statistical software package SPSS 21. The purpose of the analyses
was to determine whether there were significant differences between those
participants who received the curriculum and those who did not on scale
variables of interest. These analyses also determined whether those differ-
ences were a result of the passage of time or if they could be attributed to
participation in the curriculum. In order to test the assumption of spheric-
ity, Mauchly’s test was inspected for each variable of interest. For cases in
which the assumption of sphericity was violated, the Greenhouse-Geisser
correction was used to reduce the likelihood of a Type I Error. Mea-
sures of effect sizes (Cohen’s d and partial eta-squared) are interpreted
using Cohen’s (1988) guidelines. According to Cohen’s guidelines, effect
sizes can be considered small (d = 0.2 and eta-squared = 0.01), medium
(d = 0.5 and eta-squared = 0.06), or large (d = 0.8 and eta-squared = 0.14).
Cohen cautions, however, that these guidelines should not be inter-
preted as rigid rules as behavioral science is a very diverse field (Cohen,
1988).
An examination of the data in all four time periods indicated that
there was very little missing data with less than 5 percent missing for all
variables; for many variables, the proportion of missing data was zero. As
there were few missing values (less than 5 percent for all variables), those
values were considered missing at random; pair-wise deletion was used for
handling the missing values.
SPRING 2015 VOLUME 49, NUMBER 1 259

TABLE 2
Univariate Statistics for Variables in Analysis

Means (Standard Deviations)

T1 T2 T3 T4 Cohen’s d at T4

Financial knowledge Treatment group 2.67 4.04 3.95 4.01 1.05

(n = 94) (.82) (.62) (.66) (.57)
Control group 2.81 3.09 3.31 3.27
(n = 101) (.79) (.77) (.76) (.82)
Financial intentions Treatment group 3.08 3.76 3.62 3.59 .46
(n = 93)* (.81) (.68) (.87) (.75)
Control Group 2.97 3.11 3.26 3.24
(n = 100)* (.78) (.85) (.71) (.76)
Financial behaviors Treatment group 2.84 3.45 3.48 3.53 .52
(n = 93)* (.92) (.76) (.84) (.78)
Control group 2.76 2.82 3.12 3.12
(n = 101) (.87) (.88) (.79) (.80)
Financial strain Treatment group 2.86 2.12 2.03 1.98 .44
(n = 94) (.59) (.58) (.61) (.65)
Control group 2.84 2.62 2.40 2.26
(n = 101) (.65) (.68) (.65) (.61)

*Please note that for this analysis, pair-wise deletion was used for missing data.

RESULTS

The results from the RM-ANOVAs are included in Tables 2 and 3.

Table 2 provides the means and standard deviations for the outcomes
of interest over time as well as Cohen’s d for the difference at T4.
Table 3 summarizes the results of the RM-ANOVA analysis. The following
discussion integrates findings from Tables 2 and 3 to illustrate significance
and change over time in the variables of interest.
For financial knowledge, participants in the treatment group started
with a mean score of 2.67, lower than the control group who started
with a mean score of 2.81. However, this difference was not statistically
significant. Mauchly’s test indicated that the assumption of sphericity
had been violated, W = .67, 𝜒 2 (5) = 77.278, p < .001; therefore degrees of
freedom were corrected using Greenhouse-Geisser estimates of sphericity
(𝜀 = .77). Both groups showed improvement over time, and the effect
of time on financial knowledge was found to be significant, F (2.313,
446.313) = 163.518, p < .001, partial 𝜂 2 = .459. There was also a signif-
icant interaction between time and group F (2.313, 446.313) = 48.809,
p < .001, partial 𝜂 2 = .202, with those in the treatment group scoring statis-
tically significantly better over time on the measure of financial knowledge
than those in the control group. At T4, the treatment group had an average
260 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

TABLE 3
Repeated Measures Analysis of Variance

Partial
Eta-Squared Greenhouse-
Effect MS df Error df F p Results Geisser

Financial knowledge
Time 47.982 2.313 446.313 163.518 *** 0.459 ***
Time × group 14.322 2.313 446.313 48.809 *** 0.202 ***
Financial intentions
Time 8.552 2.754 526.102 26.098 *** 0.120 ***
Time × group 2.595 2.754 526.102 7.919 *** 0.040 ***
Financial behaviors
Time 13.236 2.586 496.486 36.952 *** 0.161 ***
Time × group 2.899 2.586 496.486 8.094 *** 0.040 ***
Financial strain
Time 22.907 2.645 510.531 112.250 *** 0.368 ***
Time × group 2.744 2.645 510.531 13.445 *** 0.065 ***

*p < .05;
**p < .01;
***p < .001.

score of 4.01 in comparison to 3.27 for the control group. The effect size
(d = 1.05) for this difference in means echoes the partial eta-squared results
and indicates a large effect of the curriculum on financial knowledge.
Participants started at a similar place for financial intentions, with mean
scores of approximately 3.08 for the treatment group and 2.97 for the
control group in T1. The difference in scores at T1 was not statistically
significant. Mauchly’s test indicated that the assumption of sphericity
had been violated, W = .88, 𝜒 2 (5) = 23.555, p < .001, therefore degrees of
freedom were corrected using Greenhouse-Geisser estimates of sphericity
(𝜀 = .92). The results showed that there was a significant effect of time on
financial intentions for both groups F (2.754, 526.102) = 26.098, p < .001,
partial 𝜂 2 = .120. The interaction between time and group was also found
to be significant, F (2.754, 526.102) = 7.919, p < .001, partial 𝜂 2 = .040,
with those in the treatment group scoring statistically significantly better
over time on the measure of financial intentions than those in the control
group, with the treatment group scoring 3.59 in comparison to 3.24 for the
control group in T4. The effect size (d = .46) for this difference in means
as well as the partial eta-squared results miss the conventional cut-off for
moderate impact by a couple hundredths of a point, indicating a close to
moderate effect of the curriculum on financial intentions.
An examination of financial behaviors showed that participants in both
groups started at a similar place with mean scores of 2.84 for the treatment
SPRING 2015 VOLUME 49, NUMBER 1 261

group and 2.76 for the control group, with no statistically significant differ-
ence between those scores. Mauchly’s test indicated that the assumption of
sphericity had been violated, W = .80, 𝜒 2 (5) = 43.818, p < .001, therefore
degrees of freedom were corrected using Greenhouse-Geisser estimates of
sphericity (𝜀 = .86). A significant effect of time on financial behaviors was
found, F (2.586, 496.486) = 36.952, p < .001, partial 𝜂 2 = .161. There was
also a significant interaction effect of time and group on financial behav-
iors, F (2.586, 496.486) = 8.094, p < .001, partial 𝜂 2 = 040, with those in
the treatment group scoring statistically significantly better over time on the
measure of financial behaviors than those in the control group. At the end
of the follow-up period, in T4, the treatment group had an average score of
3.53 in comparison to 3.12 for the control group. The effect size (d = .52)
for this difference in means coupled with the partial eta-squared results
shows a marginally moderate effect of the curriculum on financial behav-
iors. Although the scores of both groups improved over time, the treatment
group experienced a large increase between T1 and T2, while the control
group’s change was more constant and less notable, indicating a stronger
effect of the curriculum in T2.
For financial strain, participants started at a similar place with mean
scores of approximately 2.85 for each group. Mauchly’s test indi-
cated that the assumption of sphericity had been violated, W = .82,
𝜒 2 (5) = 37.094, p < .001; therefore degrees of freedom were corrected
using Greenhouse-Geisser estimates of sphericity (𝜀 = .88). The scores
of both groups decreased over time, and the results showed that the
effect of time on financial strain was statistically significant, F (2.645,
510.531) = 112.250, p < .001, partial 𝜂 2 = .368. The results also showed
that there was a significant interaction effect between time and group on
financial strain F (2.645, 510.531) = 13.445, p < .001, partial 𝜂 2 = .065,
with those in the treatment group scoring statistically significantly better
over time on the measure of financial strain than those in the control
group. At the end of the follow-up period, the treatment group scored
1.98 in comparison to 2.26 for the control group in T4. The effect size
(d = .44) for this difference in means shows a close to moderate effect in
T4 while the partial eta-squared results reveal a clearly moderate effect of
the curriculum on financial strain over the full follow-up period.

DISCUSSION

As an experimental study, the results strongly supported the hypotheses

and indicated that the differences observed post-curriculum are likely
caused by participation in the curriculum and not by other factors. The
262 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

two study groups were randomly assigned and baseline characteristics

were similar on the key variables. The analyses demonstrated that while
both groups experienced improvements over time, the treatment group
had significantly better outcomes on all measures immediately after
participation in the curriculum. Moreover and perhaps more impor-
tantly, the impact of the curriculum persisted over the full 12-month,
post-curriculum, follow-up period. Although the control group also
showed improvement over time, the smaller and slower change is likely
related to other possible services received from the domestic violence
organization.
An examination of our effect size findings indicates that the impact
of the curriculum is not only statistically significant, but also practically
important with a very large effect on financial knowledge, a moderate
effect on financial behaviors and financial strain, and a close to moderate
effect on financial intentions when comparing T1 to T4. Specifically, the
treatment group had an average improvement of between a half point and to
over a full point on self-reported financial knowledge, financial intentions,
and financial behavior, measured on a five-point scale. In comparison,
control group members improved by only half as much on each measure.
Similarly, financial strain among the treatment group decreased by 0.88
points compared to a decrease of only 0.32 for the control group. In
practical terms, these changes indicate that survivors who participated in
the curriculum had a stronger grasp of financial management than those
who did not, including understanding how to manage their money to
actually changing behaviors that demonstrate better financial practices.
Such a grasp may leave survivors more confident in their ability to, at least,
be more financially independent and, at the most, to be independent from
an abusive relationship. The immediate impact of the curriculum in T2
is particularly important in the context of abuse. While the control group
also experienced gradual improvements on all measures over time, the
abrupt change from T1 to T2 measures for the treatment group supports
the unique impact that the curriculum may have on domestic violence
survivors.
The ability to generalize these findings to other populations is limited
by several issues. First, the agencies in the study chose to participate. It
is possible that the success of the curriculum rests with the support from
the agencies and the advocates charged with providing the curriculum.
Second, all of the women in the study volunteered to participate. Although
the random assignment of participants allows us to rule out motivation
as a determinant of the observed outcomes, we cannot assume that the
curriculum would have an equal impact on women who did not want
SPRING 2015 VOLUME 49, NUMBER 1 263

to participate or who were mandated to take the curriculum. Just as

notably, the women in the sample were receiving services from a domestic
violence agency; hence, the results cannot be generalized to all women who
experience domestic violence. In addition, the demographic characteristics
of the sample are not reflective of domestic violence survivors across the
country; instead, the sample has a higher number of Latinas because of
the clientele of the programs from which survivors were recruited. Further
research is needed to understand the potential differences which may exist
with survivors from different cultures and different immigrant statuses.
Finally, some of the measures chosen were not previously validated scales;
additional validation is needed to ensure the scales appropriately capture
the construct being measured.
Despite the mentioned limitations to sample generalizability in par-
ticular, the observed results are both statistically significant and prac-
tically large, particularly regarding the impact of the curriculum on
financial knowledge. The findings also add to the growing body of
literature on the subject. First, the design of the study responds to
calls from other researchers (e.g., Collins and O’Rourke 2010; GAO
2012) for more rigorous evaluation of financial literacy programs. Sec-
ond, our findings echo those of the REAP evaluation (Sanders, Weaver,
and Schnabel 2007) even though we used a larger sample and con-
ducted multiple post-tests. Such similarities further support the effi-
cacy of implementing financial literacy programs for domestic violence
survivors.
In regard to future research, the use of the RAA for framing the
study shows great promise as a theoretical model for other evaluations of
financial education programs. As applying the RAA to changing finan-
cial behaviors is a new concept, we chose to focus on the changes
in variables over time instead of testing the relationship between vari-
ables. Further testing of the relationship between the variables and the
paths through which they are related are still needed to fully test the
RAA model. Regardless, RAA holds promise as a theory to under-
stand how to improve or change individuals’ financial behavior by
focusing on improving their financial education as well as improv-
ing their intentions and decreasing any financial strain they may be
experiencing.

PRACTICE AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS

The notable and lasting impact of participation in the curriculum for this
study sample has critical implications for other agencies serving domestic
264 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

violence survivors as well as other programs aimed at improving financial

well-being among their clientele. Many survivors have limited access to
resources and very little base knowledge and financial experience, and
may be making strides to become financially independent for the first
time. The Allstate Foundation’s curriculum begins with an explanation
of economic abuse and safety planning as a way to address concerns
specific to domestic violence survivors who may be in crisis and focused
on their immediate financial well-being and safety. At the same time,
the curriculum is very comprehensive and includes topics ranging from
budgeting to investing, hence moving beyond a focus on crisis management
in the context of domestic violence to future planning and economic
advancement. Other domestic violence survivors may benefit from this
curriculum. As economic empowerment becomes a more common goal
for agencies serving this population, practitioners should consider financial
education, specifically this curriculum, as part of their core services to
help survivors learn the fundamentals of financial management, experience
less financial stress, and take necessary steps such as changing financial
intentions and behaviors that might lead them to becoming financially
independent.
Unlike other robust evaluations of financial literacy programs that
focus on more financially stable adult populations (Collins and O’Rourke
2010; Hastings, Madrian, and Skimmyhorn 2012; Lusardi and Mitchell
2007), this study indicates that teaching financial education with domestic
violence survivors is not only theoretically important but also empirically
effective. Though the women in this study come from lower socioeconomic
statuses and, as survivors leaving abusive relationships, would be less
financially stable or have limited access to resources, the findings from
this study suggest that successful financial education and intervention are
possible and should even be considered required for this population. Our
findings indicate that financial education at key moments, such as at the
very beginning of establishing an independent life from abuse, can lead
to improved financial knowledge, intentions, and behaviors, and decreased
financial strain.
To conclude, our evaluation of the Allstate curriculum supports recent
developments in the broader financial education movement to reach dif-
ferent populations (e.g., adolescents, adults, and older adults) and adds
domestic violence survivors as another population group needing financial
education to improve their financial behaviors. This particular curriculum
takes a comprehensive approach to content from basic, short-term tools to
complex, long-term strategies. While admittedly a far step from our current
evaluation of a curriculum designed specifically for survivors of domestic
SPRING 2015 VOLUME 49, NUMBER 1 265

violence, future policy discussions on developing financial capacity should

consider these findings in possible relationship to other programs, such as
those for high school students or first year college students. Such programs
also are designed to provide a broad introduction to financial education and
are aimed at developing financial capability early in life. The basic frame-
work of the “Moving Ahead Through Financial Management” curriculum,
particularly its comprehensive approach to financial education, may serve
as a strong example of a program that aims to do something similar. By
including education on economic abuse, such programs may even prepare
these young adults to be watchful of potentially abusive partners.

REFERENCES
Adams, Adrienne E., Cris M. Sullivan, Deborah Bybee, and Megan R. Greeson. 2008. Devel-
opment of the Scale of Economic Abuse. Violence Against Women, 14 (5): 563–588. doi:
10.1177/1077801208315529.
Aldana, Steven G. and Wendy Liljenquist. 1998. Validity and Reliability of a Financial Strain Survey.
Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, 9 (2): 11–19.
Borden, Lynne M., Sun-A Lee, Joyce Serido, and Dawn Collins. 2007. Changing College Students’
Financial Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behavior through Seminar Participation. Journal of Family
and Economic Issues, 29 (1): 17.
Braunstein, Sandra and Carolyn Welch. 2002. Financial Literacy: An Overview of Practice, Research,
and Policy. Federal Reserve Bulletin, 88 (11): 445–457.
Cohen, Jacob. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd edition. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Collins, J. Michael. 2012. The Impacts of Mandatory Financial Education: Evidence from a Random-
ized Field Study. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 95: 146–158.
Collins, J. Michael and Collin O’Rourke. 2010. Financial Education and Counseling: Still Holding
Promise. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 44: 483–498.
Fishbein, Martin and Icek Ajzen. 2010. Predicting and Changing Behavior: The Reasoned Action
Approach. New York: Psychology Press, Taylor & Francis Group.
Fonseca, Raquel, Kathleen J. Mullen, Gema Zamarro, and Julie Zissimopoulos. 2012. What Explains
the Gender Gap in Financial Literacy? The Role of Household Decision Making. Journal of
Consumer Affairs, 46 (1): 90–106.
GAO. 2012. Financial Literacy: Enhancing the Effectiveness of the Federal Government’s Role.
Washington, DC: U.S. Government Accountability Office.
Gudmunson, Clinton G. and Sharon M. Danes. 2011. Family Financial Socialization: Theory and
Critical Review. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 32: 644–667.
Hastings, Justine S., Brigitte C. Madrian, and William L. Skimmyhorn. 2012. Financial Literacy,
Financial Education and Economic Outcomes. The National Bureau of Economic Research [cited
Working Paper No. 18412. Available from http://www.nber.org/papers/w18412.
Lusardi, Annamaria and Olivia S. Mitchell. 2007. Financial Literacy and Retirement Preparedness:
Evidence and Implications for Financial Education. Business Economics, 42 (1): 35–44.
Postmus, Judy L. 2010. Economic Empowerment of Domestic Violence Survivors. Harrisburg, PA:
VAWnet, a project of the National Resource Center on Domestic Violence, Pennsylvania Coalition
Against Domestic Violence.
Postmus, Judy L. and Sara-Beth Plummer. 2010. Validating The Allstate Foundation’s National
Model on Helping Survivors of Violence Achieve Economic Self-Sufficiency: Final Report. New
Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University, School of Social Work, Center on Violence Against Women
& Children.
266 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

Postmus, Judy L., Sara-Beth Plummer, Sarah McMahon, Nadine Murshid, and Misung Kim. 2012.
Understanding Economic Abuse in the Lives of Survivors. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27:
411–430.
Postmus, Judy L., Andrea Hetling, and Gretchen L Hoge. 2013. Evaluating the Impact of the
“Moving Ahead Through Financial Management” Curriculum: A Randomized Control Study. New
Brunswick, NJ: Center on Violence Against Women & Children, Rutgers University, School of
Social Work.
Raphael, J. 1999. Keeping Women Poor: How Domestic Violence Prevents Women from Leaving
Welfare and Entering the World of Work. In Battered Women, Children and Welfare Reform: The
Ties That Bind, edited by Ruth A. Brandwein (31–43). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sanders, Cynthia K. and Meg Schnabel. 2006. Organizing for Economic Empowerment of Battered
Women: Women’s Savings Accounts. The Journal of Community Practice, 14 (3): 47–68.
Sanders, Cynthia K., Terry L. Weaver, and Meg Schnabel. 2007. Economic Education for Battered
Women: An Evaluation of Outcomes. Affilia, 22 (3): 240–254.
Stark, Evan. 2007. Coercive Control: How Men Entrap Women in Personal Life. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Tamborini, Christopher R., Howard M. Iams, and Gayle L. Reznik. 2011. Women’s Earnings before and
after Marital Dissolution: Evidence from Longitudinal Earnings Records Matched to Survey Data.
Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 33: 69–82. Online First. doi: 10.1007/s10834-011-9264-1.
Tolman, Richard M. and Daniel Rosen. 2001. Domestic Violence in the Lives of Women Receiving
Welfare: Mental health, Substance Dependency and Economic Well-Being. Violence Against
Women, 7 (2): 141–158.
Vitt, Lois A., Carol Anderson, Jamie Kent, Deanna M. Lyter, Jurg K. Siegenthaler, and Jeremy Ward.
2000. Personal Finance and the Rush to Competence: Financial Literacy Education in the U.S.
Middleburg, VA: Institute for Socio-Financial Studies.
Zorza, Joan. 1991. Woman Battering: A Major Cause of Homelessness. Clearinghouse Review, 25:
421–429.