Manuscript Details

Knox, V., & Michalopoulos, C. (2023). Mother and Infant Home Visiting Program Evaluation (MIHOPE), United States, 2012-2019. MIHOPE Model Results Documentation [Study 2-HFA contrast]. Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR37848.v3.

High rating
Study reviewed under: Handbook of Procedures and Standards, Version 2
Study design characteristics contributing to rating
Design Attrition Baseline equivalence Confounding factors? Valid, reliable measures?
Randomized controlled trial Low

Not assessed for randomized controlled trials with low attrition

No

Yes

Notes from the review of this manuscript

The Mother and Infant Home Visiting Program Evaluation (MIHOPE) included four evidence-based home visiting models. This review focuses on Healthy Families America (HFA) and the findings in Knox & Michalopoulos, 2023. HomVEE has reviewed additional analyses from the MIHOPE evaluation under Michalopoulos et al., 2019.
 

One finding in this set of analyses, on a measure of breastfeeding duration, received a moderate rating because the finding demonstrated high attrition but satisfied the baseline equivalence requirement. Findings on measures of maternal health status and depression; food insecurity; parental unsupportiveness, engagement, and discipline; awareness of health and safety hazards; child behavior; and physical abuse received a rating of indeterminate because HomVEE could not assess whether the measures were reliable according to HomVEE standards. One finding on a measure of any report of child maltreatment was deemed to be ineligible for review because HomVEE does not review unsubstantiated reports of child maltreatment. Information on sample sizes and reliability and validity of measures, along with information necessary to demonstrate equivalence of the intervention and comparison groups, is based on correspondence with the authors. 

Child Development and School Readiness
Outcome Measure Timing of Follow-Up Rating Direction of Effect Effect Size (Absolute Value) Stastical Significance Sample Size Sample Description
Brief Infant Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (BITSEA), total competence score 15 months old High
Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1124 children HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Received any early intervention services (%) 15 months old High
0.09 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1101 mothers HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Use of nonparental child care 15 months old High
0.04 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1096 children HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Effect rating key
Favorable finding / Statistically significant
Unfavorable finding / Statistically significant
Ambiguous finding / Statistically significant
No effect / Not statistically significant
Child Health
Outcome Measure Timing of Follow-Up Rating Direction of Effect Effect Size (Absolute Value) Stastical Significance Sample Size Sample Description
Any Medicaid-paid nonbirth hospitalizations 15 months old High
0.03 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1375 children HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
At risk of being overweight (%) 15 months old High
0.14 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 908 children HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Duration of breastfeeding 15 months old Moderate
Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 579 children HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Normal weight (%) 15 months old High
0.06 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 908 children HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Number of Medicaid-paid immunizations 15 months old High
Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1210 children HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Primary care provider for the child (%) 15 months old High
0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1136 children HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Underweight (%) 15 months old High
0.16 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 908 children HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Effect rating key
Favorable finding / Statistically significant
Unfavorable finding / Statistically significant
Ambiguous finding / Statistically significant
No effect / Not statistically significant
Family Economic Self-Sufficiency
Outcome Measure Timing of Follow-Up Rating Direction of Effect Effect Size (Absolute Value) Stastical Significance Sample Size Sample Description
Health insurance coverage for the mother 15 months old High
0.18 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1391 mothers HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Received any transportation services 15 months old High
0.10 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1093 mothers HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Received disability insurance during the past month 15 months old High
0.03 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1098 children HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Received SNAP during the past month 15 months old High
0.03 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1097 children HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Received TANF during the past month 15 months old High
0.05 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1096 children HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Received WIC during the past month 15 months old High
0.06 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1100 children HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Effect rating key
Favorable finding / Statistically significant
Unfavorable finding / Statistically significant
Ambiguous finding / Statistically significant
No effect / Not statistically significant
Maternal Health
Outcome Measure Timing of Follow-Up Rating Direction of Effect Effect Size (Absolute Value) Stastical Significance Sample Size Sample Description
Current smoker 15 months old High
0.04 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1091 mothers HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Parenting Stress Index - Short Form (PSI-SF), parent-child dysfunctional interaction 15 months old High
Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1106 mothers HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Parenting Stress Index - Short Form (PSI-SF), parental distress 15 months old High
Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1108 mothers HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Received any behavioral health services 15 months old High
0.03 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1094 mothers HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Substance use during the past three months 15 months old High
0.03 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1084 mothers HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Effect rating key
Favorable finding / Statistically significant
Unfavorable finding / Statistically significant
Ambiguous finding / Statistically significant
No effect / Not statistically significant
Reductions In Child Maltreatment
Outcome Measure Timing of Follow-Up Rating Direction of Effect Effect Size (Absolute Value) Stastical Significance Sample Size Sample Description
Any substantiated maltreatment report 15 months old High
0.19 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1406 mothers HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Loss of custody 15 months old High
0.12 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1407 mothers HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Effect rating key
Favorable finding / Statistically significant
Unfavorable finding / Statistically significant
Ambiguous finding / Statistically significant
No effect / Not statistically significant
Reductions in Juvenile Delinquency, Family Violence, and Crime
Outcome Measure Timing of Follow-Up Rating Direction of Effect Effect Size (Absolute Value) Stastical Significance Sample Size Sample Description
Received any domestic violence services 15 months old High
0.26 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1097 mothers HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Received any services from a domestic violence shelter 15 months old High
0.49 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1096 mothers HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Revised Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS2), maternal experience with physical or sexual violence 15 months old High
0.47 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1095 mothers HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Revised Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS2), maternal perpetration of physical violence 15 months old High
0.13 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1096 mothers HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Women's Experience with Battering (WEB) Scale 15 months old High
0.48 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 1088 mothers HFA vs. Resource referral RCT (MIHOPE), 2012-2015, United States, full sample
Effect rating key
Favorable finding / Statistically significant
Unfavorable finding / Statistically significant
Ambiguous finding / Statistically significant
No effect / Not statistically significant

This study included participants with the following characteristics at enrollment:

Race/Ethnicity

The race and ethnicity categories may sum to more than 100 percent if Hispanic ethnicity was reported separately or respondents could select two or more race or ethnicity categories.

Black or African American
31%
Hispanic or Latino
34%
White
27%
Unknown
8%

Maternal Education

Less than a high school diploma
43%
High school diploma or GED
58%

Other Characteristics

Enrollment in means-tested programs
81%

This study included participants from the following locations:

  • California
  • Georgia
  • Illinois
  • Iowa
  • Kansas
  • Michigan
  • Nevada
  • New Jersey
  • Pennsylvania
  • South Carolina
  • Washington
  • Wisconsin
Study Participants

The Mother and Infant Home Visiting Program Evaluation (MIHOPE) is a national evaluation of the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) Program. MIHOPE study participants were recruited from 2012 to 2015. Participants were eligible for the MIHOPE evaluation if they were age 15 or older at enrollment, were pregnant or had children younger than six months old, spoke English or Spanish proficiently, and met the relevant eligibility criteria for the local home visiting model. A total of 1,458 participants were recruited for the study in Healthy Families America (HFA) programs and randomly assigned to either the HFA home visiting intervention group (725 participants) or the comparison condition (733 participants). Up to 1,407 participants recruited for the study through HFA programs were included in the analyses: 691 in HFA and 716 in the comparison group. Similarly, up to 1,375 children of these participants were included in the analyses: 683 in HFA and 692 in the comparison group. Outcomes were measured when children were 15 months old. For the MIHOPE participants recruited through HFA programs, 22 percent of women were of Mexican origin, 12 percent were another Hispanic ethnicity, 27 percent were White, 31 percent were Black, and 8 percent were another race. Forty-three percent had less than a high school diploma at study entry. At enrollment, the average age of participants recruited through HFA programs was 24.

Setting

The study took place in 12 states: California, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Washington, and Wisconsin. The evaluation selected 26 local program affiliates that operated Healthy Families America (HFA) and met program eligibility criteria.

Intervention condition
Comparison Conditions

Women assigned to the comparison group were not eligible to receive Healthy Families America (HFA) services. They received information about other appropriate services in their local community.

Subgroups examined

There were no subgroups reported in this manuscript.

Author Affiliation

Authors are affiliated with MDRC and subcontractors James Bell Associates, Johns Hopkins University, Mathematica, the University of Georgia, and Columbia University. HomVEE is not aware of any relationship between the authors and the home visiting model developer or distributor.

Funding Sources

This research was supported by the Administration for Children and Families, funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under a competitive award, Contract No. HHS-HHSP23320095644WC.