Frequently Asked Questions

The HomVEE “list” refers to models HomVEE has reviewed and found to meet the HHS criteria for evidence-based models. HomVEE’s annual review typically includes review of both models that are not yet evidence based (Track 1) and updates to the research on models that have previously been designated as evidence based (Track 2).

HomVEE uses a systematic process to select models for review. Track 1 models are selected using a prioritization process. HomVEE conducts a thorough literature review and scores models based on a combination of manuscript and model characteristics. Models are ranked by points and the highest-ranking models are selected for review as resources allow. (For more information, see response to the next question “How are models prioritized and reviewed by HomVEE?”) HomVEE reviews manuscripts according to our published procedures and standards. When a model is reviewed, findings from well-designed research are reported in detail in each Model Effectiveness Research Report and used to assess whether a model meets the HHS criteria. Track 2 models are reviewed on a schedule rather than a prioritization process. Regardless of whether the model meets the HHS criteria, information about each reviewed model can be accessed on the HomVEE website via the Model Search Page. A list of models HomVEE has reviewed, and whether they meet the HHS criteria, is also available in the summary brief, available on the HomVEE Resources page.

For models that are not yet evidence based (Track 1), HomVEE will select models to review by calculating a prioritization score using a combination of model and manuscript characteristics. Prioritization scoring assigns points based on various factors, including (1) number and design of eligible impact studies, (2) sample sizes and sample characteristics of the impact studies, and (3) characteristics of the model. After a model is selected for review, HomVEE will apply its latest standards to review all research that is unreviewed or was reviewed under prior standards. See the Handbook of Procedures and Evidence Standards located on the Resources page of the website for the most up to date information on these processes.

Models that are already evidence based (Track 2) are updated based on a predetermined schedule instead of using a prioritization process. Previously reviewed research about these models is not re-reviewed for these updates. The purpose of the Track 2 review is to update existing Model Effectiveness Research Reports and Model Implementation Profiles to keep them current; HomVEE does not reassess a model’s evidence rating based on a Track 2 review.

HomVEE screens all research identified through its annual call for research and literature review to identify which manuscripts are eligible for review according to HomVEE’s published procedures and standards. Specific screening criteria can be found in Chapter 2 of the Handbook of Procedures and Evidence Standards located on the Resources page of the website. Once manuscripts are screened in, manuscripts about impact studies contribute to prioritization scores. Research on models that are not prioritized for review in a given year remains in the HomVEE database for consideration in future years.

Yes, HomVEE issues a call for research every year in August that is open through September. The call is sent to relevant electronic mailing lists and is also posted on the HomVEE website homepage with instructions on how to submit research. Research can be submitted at any time, but if it is submitted outside of the call window, it will be screened the following year.

HomVEE will review new grey literature only if it is publicly available and accessible on a website (this can include a requirement for purchase) or if it is an in-press journal article. Even if the content is publicly available, HomVEE will not review dissertations, theses, conference papers, and manuscripts labeled as working papers or under review. For additional details, please see the Handbook of Procedures and Evidence Standards on the Resources page.

HomVEE aims to treat all models consistently and fairly and to have a complete picture of all observed effects for a model. Therefore, HomVEE has a systematic process for identifying all relevant research and prioritizing models for review based on the available empirical evidence. Accepting new information, studies, or research during the course of the review would significantly delay HomVEE’s annual review process. For these reasons, HomVEE cannot review specific manuscripts on request. More details on this process are available in Chapter 2 of the Handbook of Procedures and Evidence Standards located on the Resources page.

Please sign up for the HomVEE mailing list to be notified of the call for research and other HomVEE-related news. To join the email list, find the "Stay in touch" box on the bottom of the Home page, enter your email address and click the Subscribe button.

You may request a re-review if you think that (1) in applying the criteria to determine whether a particular model is evidence based, HomVEE made one or more errors; and (2) if these errors were addressed, the model would be evidence based. Specifically, you may request reconsideration of the evidence-based determination based on misapplication of the HHS criteria, missing information, or errors on the HomVEE website. These concerns should be described in detail and submitted to: HomVEE@acf.hhs.gov. Pending approval from HHS, an independent re-review team will conduct a new review of the manuscript(s) in question. Re-reviews are conducted using the procedures and standards in place at the time of the original review.

HomVEE aims to issue a final decision as to whether the standards were accurately applied within 60 days of the submission of the request for review. All requests must be submitted to HomVEE@acf.hhs.gov. Once a decision is made, the requester will be notified, and any necessary adjustments will be made to reports on the HomVEE website. For more information on the re-review process, see Chapter 2 of the Handbook of Procedures and Evidence Standards on the Resources page.

Track 1 early childhood home visiting models are models that HomVEE has not yet found to be evidence-based. Track 2 models are models that HomVEE has already found to be evidence-based. 

HomVEE treats Track 1 and Track 2 models differently. 

HomVEE reviews Track 1 models to determine if they meet HHS criteria for evidence of effectiveness (see FAQ “How does HomVEE apply HHS criteria for evidence-based early childhood service delivery models?” ). During each review for a Track 1 model, HomVEE re-reviews all previously-reviewed research about that model using the latest HomVEE standards. This may result in changes to a manuscript’s rating or eligibility. If a study manuscript no longer meets standards, HomVEE may remove the findings from the website. Based on the most recent review results, HomVEE determines whether a Track 1 model meets the criteria to be evidence-based. 

HomVEE does not re-review Track 2 models but periodically updates their model reports to include the most recent research. Each update uses the current standards to review new research identified since the last update, but does not re-review research. That means that some research on the HomVEE website about Track 2 models might no longer be eligible for review under the latest procedures and standards. Importantly, HomVEE does not reassess Track 2 models against the HHS criteria when it updates their reports. That means Track 2 models retain their evidence-based status.

MIECHV’s authorizing statute (Social Security Act, Section 511(d)(3)(A)(i)(1) [42 U.S.C. 711(d)(3)(A)(i)(1)]) requires that models implemented through MIECHV be evaluated using well-designed and rigorous randomized controlled research designs or quasi-experimental designs (QEDs). Therefore, HomVEE only reviews studies using these types of designs. In addition to randomized controlled trials (RCTs), HomVEE reviews three types of QEDs: (1) single-case designs (SCDs), (2) regression discontinuity designs (RDDs), and (3) non-experimental comparison group designs (NEDs). These are the only study designs that are eligible for review by HomVEE.

Study designs vary in their relative risk of bias—that is, they vary in the extent to which researchers can be confident that impacts are due to home visiting rather than other factors. HomVEE accounts for risk of bias when assigning ratings to research. Generally, HomVEE assigns manuscripts about impact studies a rating of high, moderate, or low. Research with a higher risk of bias receives a lower rating. HomVEE routinely contacts authors if additional details are needed to assess the appropriate rating to assign to the manuscript. The fourth rating HomVEE can assign is “indeterminate.” An indeterminate rating means that HomVEE reviewers lacked sufficient information on one or more features of the study design to rate the manuscript as high or moderate. A rating of indeterminate is not a statement about the quality of the research or the research design. For more details, please see Chapter 3 of the Handbook of Procedures and Evidence Standards located on the Resources page.

HomVEE focuses its resources on reviewing manuscripts about impact studies that answer the review’s core question of whether an early childhood home visiting model is effective. Research that answers other questions is not eligible for review by HomVEE. For example, questions about for whom and under what circumstances a model is effective are valuable to the field but beyond the scope of the HomVEE review.

Research evaluating the impact of an isolated model feature or group of features is generally ineligible for HomVEE’s annual review, as are certain types of findings based on (1) covariate-unadjusted analyses, (2) item-level measures, and (3) binary variables. Additionally, analyses designed to answer questions other than whether a model is effective are generally ineligible for review. A longer discussion of contrasts that HomVEE reviews and ineligible and preferred analyses can be found in Chapter 3 of the Handbook of Procedures and Evidence Standards.

HomVEE’s Reporting Guide for Authors provides guidance about how to describe each eligible research design and how to report findings in a way that is clear, complete, and transparent. Reporting the information described in the Reporting Guide for Authors is considered a best practice in general, but it can also help HomVEE reviewers determine the appropriate rating to assign to the manuscript.