Manuscript Details

Chazan-Cohen, R., Raikes, H. H., & Vogel, C. (2013). V. Program subgroups: Patterns of impacts for home-based, center-based, and mixed-approach programs. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 78(1), 93-109.

High rating
Study reviewed under: Handbook of Procedures and Standards, Version 1
Study design characteristics contributing to rating
Design Attrition Baseline equivalence Confounding factors? Valid, reliable measures?
Randomized controlled trial Low

Established on race/ethnicity and SES; established on some relevant outcomes.

None

Not assessed in manuscripts reviewed under Handbook of Procedures and Standards, Version 1
Notes from the review of this manuscript

In 2020, HomVEE updated the details of this review in the Reductions in Child Maltreatment domain in two ways. First, HomVEE removed the child witnessed violence finding from the Reductions in Child Maltreatment domain because it does not assess where (in the home or elsewhere) the child witnessed that violence and is therefore ineligible for review in this domain. Second, HomVEE moved measures of percent spanked last week from the Reductions in Child Maltreatment domain to the Positive Parenting Practices domain because ACF determined that nonviolent discipline and corporal punishment outcomes belong in the Positive Parenting Practices domain, unless those outcome are assessed using the Conflict Tactics Scale-Parent/Child.

Although the authors do not control for baseline measures of outcomes, the following outcomes rate high: child outcomes, which were not assessable at baseline, and parent employment and income outcomes, which were equivalent at baseline. Two outcomes rate moderate because the authors do not establish baseline equivalence: "parent depression" and "someone in household had alcohol/drug problem in past year." This review reports only those outcomes not previously reported in Love et al. (2001, 2002). Note that this manuscript reports both ITT and TOT estimates, but only ITT estimates are reported here.

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
CBCL Aggressive behavior Age 5 High
0.09 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 927 Home-based program approach
FACES positive approaches to learning Age 5 High
0.18 Statistically significant, p < 0.01 927 Home-based program approach
FACES Social Behavior Problems Age 5 High
0.13 Statistically significant, p < 0.05 927 Home-based program approach
Child has an individualized education plan Age 5 High
0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 802 Home-based program approach
Engagement during play Age 5 High
0.04 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 829 Home-based program approach
English receptive vocabulary (PPVT) Age 5 High
0.05 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 802 Home-based program approach
Leiter attention sustained Age 5 High
0.09 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 802 Home-based program approach
Negativity toward parent during play Age 5 High
0.01 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 829 Home-based program approach
Observed attention Age 5 High
0.07 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 802 Home-based program approach
Observed Leiter emotion regulation Age 5 High
0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 802 Home-based program approach
Speech problems Age 5 High
0.10 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 802 Home-based program approach
Woodcock Johnson Applied Problems Age 5 High
0.08 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 802 Home-based program approach
Woodcock Johnson Letter-Word identification (English) Age 5 High
0.03 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 802 Home-based program approach
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
Parent employed Age 5 High
0.00 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 927 Home-based program approach
Parent income (dollars) Age 5 High
0.16 Statistically significant, p < 0.05 927 Home-based program approach
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
Parent depression Age 5 Moderate
0.08 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 927 Home-based program approach
Someone in household had alcohol/drug problem in past year Age 5 Moderate
0.04 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 927 Home-based program approach
Effect rating key
Favorable finding / Statistically significant
Unfavorable finding / Statistically significant
Ambiguous finding / Statistically significant
No effect / Not statistically significant
Positive Parenting Practices
Outcome Measure Timing of Follow-Up Rating Direction of Effect Effect Size (Absolute Value) Stastical Significance Sample Size Sample Description
HOME Language and Literacy Age 5 High
0.16 Statistically significant, p < 0.05 927 Home-based program approach
Children's books (26 or more) Age 5 High
0.14 Statistically significant, p < 0.05 927 Home-based program approach
Parent supportiveness during play Age 5 High
0.04 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 927 Home-based program approach
Percent reading daily Age 5 High
0.15 Statistically significant, p < 0.05 927 Home-based program approach
Percent spanked last week Age 5 High
0.06 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05 927 Home-based program approach
Teaching activities Age 5 High
0.15 Statistically significant, p < 0.05 927 Home-based program approach
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
25%
Hispanic or Latino
27%
White
45%
Unknown
3%

Maternal Education

Less than a high school diploma
47%
High school diploma or GED
28%
Unknown
25%

Other Characteristics

Enrollment in means-tested programs
50%

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 home-based EHS or a comparison condition. This study included outcomes reported for the 5-year-old follow-up (other years of follow-up are reported in separate studies). For this follow-up, 927 parents (479 in EHS-HBO and 448 in the comparison group) provided data for parent interviews.

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
Comparison Conditions

Control group families could not receive EHS-HBO services, but could receive other services available in their community.

Author Affiliation

None of the study authors are developers of this model.

Funding Sources

Administration for Children and Families (ACF), the Child Outcomes Research and Evaluation team (CORE) within ACF’s Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation (OPRE), and the Head Start Bureau in the Administration on Children, Youth and Families (ACYF).