Black or African American
24%
Jones Harden, B., Chazan-Cohen, R., Raikes, H., & Vogel, C. (2012). Early Head Start home visitation: The role of implementation in bolstering program benefits. Journal of Community Psychology, 40(4), 438-455.
Additional Sources:
-
Jones Harden, B., Chazan-Cohen, R., Raikes, H., & Vogel, C. (2010). Early Head Start home visitation: The role of implementation in bolstering program benefits. Unpublished manuscript.
Model(s): Early Head Start—Home-based option
Study design characteristics contributing to rating
| Design | Attrition | Baseline equivalence | Confounding factors? | Valid, reliable measures? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Randomized controlled trial | Low |
Established on race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status; outcome not assessable at baseline. |
None |
Not assessed in manuscripts reviewed under Handbook of Procedures and Standards, Version 1 |
Notes from the review of this manuscript
Here, we report only the FACES aggression outcome; all other outcomes are reported in the Love et al. (2002) report or Chazan-Cohen et al. (2013) article.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FACES aggression | Kindergarten entry | High | 0.07 | Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 | 928 children | EHS-HBO impact study |
This study included participants from the following locations:
- State not reported or international
Study Participants
This study relies on data from a randomized controlled trial of 17 Early Head Start (EHS) programs that began in 1995. Seven of the programs served clients through a home-based option (though other clients in other EHS options also received home visits) and are the focus of this report (EHS-HBO). The study randomly assigned 1,385 families, who applied to those seven programs, either to receive EHS-HBO or a comparison condition. This study included outcomes reported for the 2-, 3-, and 5-year-old follow-up, but to avoid overlap with other studies included in this report, only the 5-year results are reported here. For this follow-up, 928 parents (479 in EHS-HBO and 449 in the comparison group)1 provided data for parent interviews. Among parent interview participants, 47 percent were white, 24 percent were black, and 27 percent were Hispanic. Fewer than one in four parents had education beyond high school, and one in 10 were in families living above the poverty line; one-third to one-half of families were receiving welfare (AFDC) or Food Stamps.
1 Analytic sample sizes and characteristics obtained through correspondence with the authors.
Setting
The study was conducted in 17 EHS programs throughout the United States, including seven programs with home-based options, which are the focus of this report. Four programs were located in urban areas, and three programs were located in rural areas. The seven programs represented a mix of implementation timing; one early implementer had all EHS-HBO elements in place by 1997, and three later implementers had all elements in place by 1999; three programs did not have all elements in place by 1999. The early-implementing program had fully implemented both child and family development services early and continued to have those services in place in 1999.
Intervention condition
Note: Navigate to the model page for more information about the home visiting model. See the source manuscript for more information about how the model was implemented in this study.
Comparison Conditions
Control group families could not receive EHS-HBO services, but could receive other services available in their community.
Funding Sources
Funder(s) not listed.