Implementing Child Parent Enrichment Project (CPEP)

Model implementation summary last updated: 2012

The information in this implementation report reflects feedback, if provided, from this model’s developer as of the above date. The description of the implementation of the model(s) here may differ from how the model(s) was implemented in the manuscripts reviewed to determine this model’s evidence of effectiveness. Inclusion in the implementation report does not mean the practices described meet the HHS criteria for evidence of effectiveness. Please see the Effectiveness button on the left for more information about any research on the effectiveness of the model, including any version(s) of the model with effectiveness research. Versions of the model that are described in the Adaptations and enhancements section of this implementation report may include (1) versions that were identified by the model’s developer and (2) versions that have been implemented by researchers and have manuscripts that HomVEE rated high or moderate, but that are not supported by the model’s developer.

Model overview

Theoretical approach

Child Parent Enrichment Project (CPEP) was based on the theory that enhancing mother-child relationships, social and material support, goal setting, and problem solving can reduce the risk of child abuse. Positive mother-child relationships were seen as a byproduct of a healthy pregnancy and labor, an overall feeling of wanting the child, and knowing that caring for the child will be manageable. Having the emotional, informational, and material resources that often accompany a social support network were thought to lessen the risk of child maltreatment. The ability to set goals and solve problems could help parents manage the difficulties of infant caregiving. Implementation of CPEP was based on a task-centered approach in which parents identified and completed tasks to achieve their goals.

View Revisions

Implementation support

CPEP was developed as a child abuse-prevention pilot program by Richard Barth at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Social Welfare and offered through a nonprofit community-based organization. Implementation support was available through the developer.

View Revisions

Intended population

CPEP targeted pregnant women at risk for child abuse. Mothers were eligible for referral to the program if they exhibited two or more risk factors on a nine-item checklist, although community professionals had considerable discretion when making referrals. The checklist included underuse of needed community services; a criminal or mental illness record; mother previously suspected of abuse; low self-esteem; chaotic lifestyle; lack of social support from father or family; low intelligence or poor health of mother; unplanned or unwanted pregnancy; and previous or ongoing abuse of mother.

View Revisions

Targeted outcomes

CPEP aimed to reduce the stressors that can contribute to child abuse, promote good parenting, and ultimately reduce child abuse.

View Revisions

Model services

CPEP services consisted of home visits with paraprofessional parenting consultants. During home visits, consultants and parents discussed tasks associated with the parent’s goals for caring for herself and the child and recorded tasks that had been performed. Tasks could be completed during or between home visits, and in the parent’s home or within the community. There were three types of tasks: parent-focused, consultant-focused, and shared. Parent-focused tasks were completed by the parents alone and could include preparing one clean room for the baby to come home to; visiting a thrift shop to obtain a crib; visiting the labor room; and using a respite care program one-half day per week after the child is born. Tasks led by parenting consultants, either during or between visits, included modeling positive parenting and home care skills; advocating on a client’s behalf; and discussing the care of a colicky baby. Typical joint tasks were driving together to a church to pick up food and repairing an appliance together.

View Revisions

Model intensity and length

Home visits occurred approximately twice per month over a six-month period.

View Revisions

Adaptations and enhancements

No adaptations or enhancements were made to CPEP.

View Revisions

Staffing requirements

Public health, education, or social service professionals referred clients to CPEP after assessing clients during routine meetings to determine whether their circumstances might be risk factors for child abuse. Paraprofessional parenting consultants delivered the program components. Parenting consultants were paired with parents from the same geographic community and of the same racial/ethnic background. No information is available regarding supervisor or coordinator roles.

View Revisions

Implementation notes

The information contained on this page was last updated in April 2012. In addition, the information contained in this profile was reviewed for accuracy by Dr. Barth in April 2012. HomVEE reserves the right to edit the profile for clarity and consistency.

View Revisions

Data systems/technology requirements

No information is available.

View Revisions

Requirements for program certification

CPEP was developed as a pilot program and did not require approval or certification to operate.

View Revisions

Staff ratio requirements

Parenting consultants each carried a caseload of about 10 families and worked 20 hours per week.

View Revisions

Supervision requirements

Parenting consultants were primarily supervised as a group, with consultation provided as needed.

No information about the ratio of supervisors to home visitors is available.

View Revisions

Where to find out more

Richard P. Barth, Ph.D., M.S.W.
University of Maryland, School of Social Work
Phone: (410) 706-7794

View Revisions