I can save

1. Description of the programme
2. The study
3. Key findings
4. Points to consider

Description of the programme

The I Can Save (ICS) programme aimed to:

• Build knowledge of basic financial and economic principles amongst children and their parents
• Increase access to and the use of savings accounts and help children learn how to manage their money, and
• Develop children’s aspirations and expectations for their post-secondary education and training.

The programme was delivered to children aged between 6 and 12 over four years (2003 to 2007) through classroom teaching in an urban elementary school in Midwest America. The content of the lessons was taken from Financial Fitness for Life and Wise Pocket Money (financial capability curricula developed in America).

Teachers delivered the classroom education during the first year of the programme and received training from the Centre for Entrepreneurship and Economic Education at the University of Missouri. In subsequent years ICS programme staff began teaching the financial lessons and assumed all responsibility for classroom education by the programme’s fourth year.

The ICS after-school programme provided the opportunity for the children to visit the bank involved in the programme on a monthly basis during the school year, beginning in the second year of the programme. During these visits to the bank, children made deposits (each child was given $1 for attending each weekly ICS club). Children taking part in ICS received incentives for saving, including a $500 ‘seed deposit’ and one-for-one matched savings for all deposits into the account up to a total of $1,500.

The in-school financial education lessons were delivered weekly for half an hour. The ICS club met once a week for an hour.

As part of the programme a number of workshops were also delivered to parents with the aim of improving their financial education. 48 parents took part in the programme and attended an average of five workshops each. Workshop topics included: financial values and goals, debt, budgeting and college savings.

The study

One independent impact evaluation of the programme conducted by Sherraden & Johnson (from 2003-2007) has been published. This study used a quasi-experimental design involving a treatment group and a comparison group. Pre- and post-programme tests were undertaken with the students. Additionally, participating students were interviewed, focus groups were conducted with teachers involved in the programme, and programme data (including savings account data) was assessed.

Reference:

Sherraden, M. S., Johnson, L., Guo, B. and Elliott, W. (2011). 'Financial capability in children: Effects of participation in a school-based financial education and savings program', Journal of Family & Economic Issues, 32(3): 385-399. University of Missouri-St. Louis Centre for Social Development.

Key findings

The evaluation found positive impacts in relation to the following outcomes:

• Financial behaviour: Importantly, there was no statistically significant difference between participants and the comparison group in relation to their money management behaviours, including saving. Authors suggest this could be on account of the small sample size and is a finding that requires further research.
• Financial capability (ability): When assessed using a financial knowledge test a significant increase was seen in the scores of participants after the programme compared to no significant increase amongst the comparison group. The treatment group scored higher on all topics within the financial knowledge test with the largest increase being on the topic of income.
• Qualitative evidence from focus groups also supported survey evidence that ICS was effective at improving its participants’ financial knowledge.

Points to consider

• Generalisability / transferability: The sample size was relatively small (a treatment group of 35 and a control group of 18 children) so care must be taken when interpreting the findings on impact or any attempts are made to generalise these results.
• Methodological limitations: The study also highlighted some differences in the profile of the two groups which may have affected the validity of the findings.

Full report

Full research report