Evaluating the Impact of a Financial Knowledge Curriculum on Financial Empowerment for Survivors of Intimate Partner Violence

Background and Purpose: One of the most significant barriers IPV survivors face when trying to leave an abusive relationship is a lack of financial resources. Financial literacy interventions can help survivors to take control of their financial resources and work toward financial independence, which may ultimately enable survivors to escape abuse. While initial evaluations of these programs have been positive, none have specifically focused on the construct of psychological empowerment in the financial domain (PEFD) and whether increasing financial literacy is effective in empowering survivors. Thus, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a financial knowledge curriculum in increasing PEFD over time for a sample of IPV survivors.

Methods: Data for this study came from a longitudinal randomized controlled trial conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of a financial knowledge program for IPV survivors. Survivors were recruited from 14 IPV organizations across 7 states plus Puerto Rico (N=449). Latent growth curve modeling (LGCM) was used to determine whether a financial knowledge curriculum increased PEFD for IPV survivors over time using Amos Graphics 24. Three curve models were tested to identify which was the best fit for the data: linear, quadratic, and unspecified. LGCM was then used to determine whether random assignment was a time-invariant predictor of change. The analyses were first conducted on the intent-to-treat (ITT) analytic sample and then replicated using the per-protocol analytic sample to confirm findings.

Findings: Chi-square difference tests confirmed that the unspecified curve model was the best fitting for both the ITT and per-protocol analytic samples. For the ITT sample, the estimated covariance between the intercept and slope factor was statistically significant (p < .001). The positive estimate of .081 suggests that participants whose PEFD scores were high at T1 demonstrated a higher rate of increase in scores over the 14-month study. The variance for the slope was statistically significant (p < .01) but the intercept was not. When random assignment was tested as a time-invariant predictor of change, assignment was found be to a statistically significant predictor of initial status but not rate of change.

For the per-protocol sample, the estimated covariance between the intercept and slope factor was not statistically significant. However, the variances for slope was statistically significant (p < .05) and the intercept was approaching significance. When random assignment was tested as a time-invariant predictor of change, assignment was found to be a statistically significant predictor of rate of change .342 (p < .001) but not initial status.

Conclusion and Implications: Findings from this study are positive as they suggest that the financial literacy curriculum was an effective intervention strategy for promoting PEFD among survivors of IPV. However, other factors may moderate the effectiveness of the intervention, specifically for the ITT sample who did not complete the interviews across all four time points. Given the limited availability of financial literacy programming, additional resources should be allocated to promote PEFD among IPV survivors and broader audiences.