"If I don't have credit, I don't have anything": Perspectives on the credit scoring system among mothers with low incomes.

This mixed-methods study examines consumer perspectives on the credit scoring system drawn from in-depth interviews with 72 mothers with low incomes and national survey data from the National Financial Capability Study. Interviewees express strong awareness of credit scoring and a desire to have good credit. National survey data corroborate these findings, showing that most mothers with low incomes are knowledgeable about their credit scores. They know what behaviors improve credit standing and recognize the tradeoffs between present consumption and longer-run goals. They do not reject the credit scoring system's legitimacy and seek to work within this system to pursue their financial goals, despite obstacles to success. This evidence enriches our understanding of the perspectives and values that motivate consumer financial behaviors and highlights the systemic challenges to people's financial well-being that are embedded in a seemingly widely accepted credit scoring system.

"I Don't Like All Those Fees" Pragmatism About Financial Services Among Low-Income Parents.

Basic financial services facilitate people's ability to manage their finances, save, and receive payments from employers or the government. Drawing on survey data as well as qualitative interviews with 80 mothers with limited incomes, we find that parents take a pragmatic view and use a wide range of financial services to meet their needs including fintech, prepaid cards, and mobile phone-based solutions, as well as traditional banks. Mistrust in institutions is an important factor in shaping the services mothers avoid. Structural factors, like employers' payment methods, also play a role in financial service use. These low-income parents of young children are actively using a range of financial services, much broader than those provided by traditional banks. Many mothers engaged in complex financial management practices to receive income and pay their bills. This opens room for potentially costly errors and is, at least, taxing their cognitive bandwidth. Researchers must attend to the diverse set of financial services with which parents engage and investigate how this affects families' financial wellbeing and inclusion.

Barriers to Enrollment in Health Coverage in Colorado.

As part of the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, Colorado has expanded Medicaid and also now operates its own health insurance exchange for individuals (called Connect for Health Colorado). As of early 2014, more than 300,000 Coloradans have newly enrolled in Medicaid or health insurance through Connect for Health Colorado, but there also continues to be a diverse mix of individuals in Colorado who remain eligible for but not enrolled in either private insurance or Medicaid. The Colorado Health Foundation commissioned the RAND Corporation to conduct a study to better understand why these individuals are not enrolled in health insurance coverage and to develop recommendations for how Colorado can strengthen its outreach and enrollment efforts during the next open enrollment period, which starts in November 2014. RAND conducted focus groups with uninsured and newly insured individuals across the state and interviews with local stakeholders responsible for enrollment efforts in their regions. The authors identified 11 commonly cited barriers, as well as several that were specific to certain regions or populations (such as young adults and seasonal workers). Collectively, these barriers point to a set of four priority recommendations that stakeholders in Colorado may wish to consider: (1) Support and expand localized outreach and tailored messaging; (2) Strengthen marketing and messaging to be clear, focused on health benefits of insurance (rather than politics and mandates), and actionable; (3) Improve the clarity and transparency of insurance and health care costs and enrollment procedures; and (4) Revisit the two-stage enrollment process and improve Connect for Health Colorado website navigation and technical support.

Process Evaluation of the New Mexico Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Competitive Development Grant.

This article describes the evaluation of the New Mexico Home Visiting Competitive Development Grant, which sought to pilot test the use of implementation supports to improve the development and implementation of home visiting programs. Each community was to use Getting To Outcomes® (GTO) and ECHO® (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes) to support their work. The GTO framework promotes capacity for high-quality programming by specifying ten steps that practitioners should take and by providing support to complete those steps. ECHO involves specialists providing training and technical assistance via distance technology to community practitioners in rural areas to improve the quality of services. The grant was delayed, and the project's scope shifted significantly from the original plan. The evaluation documents significant challenges in meeting grant goals. A local team hired to facilitate GTO did not use it as designed, and no communities were trained in GTO. The coalitions that were developed operated with few resources or accountability, and made little progress on plans to enhance services. Only two of the four communities started home visiting after nearly a year and a half. ECHO was used with fidelity with those two programs. There was no change in the continuum of services to support children and families. Due to delays and lack of implementation of the proposed intervention, the evaluation was not able to assess the project's impact on child or family outcomes, nor did the project serve as a robust pilot test of the use of GTO and ECHO to improve home visiting implementation.