The Healthy Families Bright Futures Program

Teens only- both dichotomous scores and mean scores calculated for each subscale administered (privacy control, social control, intimidation). Items refer to frequency of past month victimization (0 times [0], 1-3 times [1], 4-10 times [2], more than 10 times [3]). Higher scores reflect greater victimization.

Teens only- both dichotomous scores and mean scores calculated for each subscale administered (cyber control, social control, intimidation). Items refer to frequency of past month perpetration (0 times [0], 1-3 times [1], 4-10 times [2], more than 10 times [3]). Higher scores reflect greater perpetration.

Teens only, two items that query about intentions to drink alcohol in the next 3 months and the next 30 days. Rating scale responses ranging from 1- Definitely will and 5- Definitely won't. Mean score of both items are calculated. Possible range 1 to 5, higher scores reflect lower intentions to use alcohol.

Teens only- Items assesses frequency of alcohol use and frequency of getting drunk in past 30 days. Response options are: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6-9, 10-19, 20-39, 40+. Mean scores across both items are calculated. Higher scores reflect more frequent alcohol use.

Teens only- both total and subscale (opportunistic, social pressure, emotional relief) scores are calculated. Items are summed. Higher scores reflect greater alcohol refusal self-efficacy. Possible total range 9- 54.

Teens only- both a dichotomous and mean score calculated. For each item, teens indicate how often in the past month they engaged in the SGM specific dating violence behavior with options of 0 times (0), 1-3 times (1), 4-10 times (2), more than 10 times (3). Higher scores reflect greater engagement in SGM specific IPV.

Teens only- both a dichotomous and mean score calculated. For each item, teens indicate how often in the past month they experience the SGM specific dating violence behavior with options of 0 times (0), 1-3 times (1), 4-10 times (2), more than 10 times (3). Higher scores reflect greater SGM specific IPV victimization.

Teens and caregivers- subscales consist of 6 items each with one assessing appropriateness (e.g., the program was a good match to my needs), one assessing acceptability (e.g., I liked the program), and one assessing feasibility (e.g., The skills I learned in the program are easy to use). Mean scores are calculated for each subscale. For each item, participants rate their agreement with the statement on a 5 point scale ranging from 1 strongly disagree to 5 strongly agree. Mean subscale scores are compared to scale midpoint (3). Scores significantly above the midpoint are evidence of intervention acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility.

Teens only-Total scores are calculated. Higher scores reflect greater depression symptoms. Possible range 0-24.

Teens only- two items assessing perceptions of on how many occasions participants believed LGBTQ+ teens on average drank and got drunk in the past 30 days. Response options are: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6-9, 10-19, 20-39, 40+ Mean scores are calculated across both items. Higher scores represent greater perceived drinking norms.

Teens only- 18 items assessing participants' perceptions of the percentage of LGBTQ+ teens who engaged in a variety of dating violence perpetration behaviors. For each item, participants estimate percentage of teens who engaged in each behavior in the past month, ranging from 0 to 100%. Mean scores are calculated for each subscale: social control, physical abuse, sexual abuse, isolation, cyber control, intimidation. Higher scores reflect greater perceived dating violence norms.

Teens only- mean scores are calculated for both subscales: positive sexual messages, negative sexual messages. Higher scores reflect greater sexual communication self-efficacy. Subscale scores can range from 1 to 4.

Teens only- 9 items that assess participants' self-efficacy to engage in healthy communication strategies with their dating partners. Mean scores across all items are calculated. Higher scores reflect greater healthy communication self-efficacy. Scores can range from 1 to 4.

Teens only- 11 items assess internalized homonegativity. One item that assesses comfort in LGBTQ+ bars was omitted. Items were modified to refer to LGBTQ+ identities. Total scores are calculated. Higher scores reflect greater internalized homonegativity. Scores can range from 11 to 55.

Caregivers only- three subscales administered: physical and sexual development, emotional responsivity and communication, and discipline and behavior management. Mean scores are calculated for each subscale. Higher scores reflect greater self-efficacy. Scores for each subscale can range from 1 to 4.

Teens and caregivers- mean scores are calculated for caregivers and teens for each subscale: parental knowledge, parental control, comunication. Higher scores on each subscale reflect greater use of each parental monitoring strategy. Scores on each subscale can range from 1 to 5.

Teens and caregivers- total scores for each subscale are calculated separately for teens and caregivers: open communication and problem free communication. Higher scores reflect less perceived communication problems. Scores can range from 10 to 100 for each subscale.

Caregivers only- Total score are calculated for each subscale (positive parenting, inconsistent discipline, poor supervision). Higher subscale scores reflect greater engagement in that parenting behavior. Scores on each subscale can range from 5 to 15.

Teens only- Total scores are calculated for each subscale (self-awareness, self-management and motivation, social awareness and prosocial behavior, decision making). Higher scores reflect greater perceived competence. Scores for self awareness subscale range from 4 to 20, scores for the self-management and decision making subscales range from 3 to 15, scores for the social awareness subscale range from 6 to 30.

Teens and caregivers- mean scores are calculated for each subscale separately for teens and caregivers (interpersonal positive, interpersonal negative). For each subscale, higher scores reflect greater engagement in that behavior by the caregiver. Scores on each subscale can range from 0 to 4.