Skip Navigation

Healthy Families America (HFA)®

Meets DHHS criteria for an evidenced based model

Last Updated: April 2017

Effects Shown in Research & Outcome Measure Details for Reductions in Child Maltreatment Outcomes

Impact Studies Rated High


Caldera, D., Burrell, L., Rodriguez, K., Crowne, S. S., Rohde, C., & Duggan, A. (2007). Impact of a statewide home visiting program on parenting and on child health and development. Child Abuse & Neglect, 31(8), 829–852. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2007.02.008
Additional Source:

Cluxton-Keller, F., Burrell, L., Crowne, S., McFarlane, E., Tandon, S., Leaf, P., & Duggan, A. (2014). Maternal relationship insecurity and depressive symptoms as moderators of home visiting impacts on child outcomes. Journal of Child & Family Studies, 23(8), 1430-1443.

Show Study Effects Details
Outcome Effect Sample Timing of Follow-Up Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Mean Difference or Odds Ratio
Statistical Significance
Effect Size
Outcome Type
No ER visits due to injuries No Effect Families with complete medical record data, Alaska trial Child age 2 268 children 19% 22% OR = 0.81 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.11 Primary
No hospitalizations due to injuries No Effect Families with complete medical record data, Alaska trial Child age 2 268 children 63% 58% OR = 1.20 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.13 Primary
No injuries requiring medical care No Effect Families with complete medical record data, Alaska trial Child age 2 268 children 71% 68% OR = 1.10 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.09 Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Description of Measure Data Collection Method Properties of the Outcome Measure Outcome Type
No ER visits due to injuries Counts of child injuries that required medical care per medical record for families with complete medical record data Review of medical records Not applicable Primary
No hospitalizations due to injuries Hospitalizations per medical record for families with complete medical record data Review of medical records Not applicable Primary
No injuries requiring medical care Counts of child injuries that required medical care per medical record for families with complete medical record data Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Primary

Chambliss, J. W. (1998). An experimental trial of a home visiting program to prevent child maltreatment (Doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University, 1998). Dissertation Abstracts International, 61(03B), 152-1628. (AAI9967277)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome Effect Sample Timing of Follow-Up Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Mean Difference or Odds Ratio
Statistical Significance
Effect Size
Outcome Type
Substantiated CPS reports No Effect Full sample, Georgia trial Year 1 249 families 6.9% 5.0% 1.9 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.2 Primary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Description of Measure Data Collection Method Properties of the Outcome Measure Outcome Type
Substantiated CPS reports Counts of the number of substantiated reports of child abuse or neglect Review of CPS records Not available Primary

Duggan, A. K., McFarlane, E. C., Windham, A. M., Rohde, C. A., Salkever, D. S., Fuddy, L., et al. (1999). Evaluation of Hawaii’s Healthy Start program. Future of Children, 9(1), 66–90; discussion 177–178.
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome Effect Sample Timing of Follow-Up Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Mean Difference or Odds Ratio
Statistical Significance
Effect Size
Outcome Type
Ever had injury needing medical care No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 1 564 children 9% 11% -2 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.14 Secondary
Ever had injury needing medical care No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Years 1 and 2 534 children 22% 24% -2 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.07 Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Description of Measure Data Collection Method Properties of the Outcome Measure Outcome Type
Ever had injury needing medical care Percentage of children who had ever had an injury that required medical care Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary

Duggan, A., McFarlane, E., Fuddy, L., Burrell, L., Higman, S. M., Windham, A., et al. (2004). Randomized trial of a statewide home visiting program: Impact in preventing child abuse and neglect. Child Abuse & Neglect, 28(6), 597–622.
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome Effect Sample Timing of Follow-Up Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Mean Difference or Odds Ratio
Statistical Significance
Effect Size
Outcome Type
Assault on child’s self-esteem (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Years 1-3 558 mothers Not available Not available OR = 0.90 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Assault on child’s self-esteem (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 3 541 mothers 42% 44% -2 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.05 Secondary
Assault on child’s self-esteem (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 2 549 mothers 35% 35% 0 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.00 Secondary
Assault on child’s self-esteem (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 1 558 mothers 20% 22% -2 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.07 Secondary
Common corporal/verbal punishment (past week) (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 1 558 mothers 58% 57% 1 Not available HomVEE = 0.02 Secondary
Common corporal/verbal punishment (past week) (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Years 1-3 558 mothers Not available Not available OR = 1.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Common corporal/verbal punishment (past week) (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 2 549 mothers 75% 74% 1 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.03 Secondary
Common corporal/verbal punishment (past week) (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 3 541 mothers 77% 75% 2 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.07 Secondary
Common corporal/verbal punishment (past year) (CTS-PC) Favorable Full sample, Hawaii trial Years 1-3 558 mothers Not available Not available OR = 0.59 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Not available Secondary
Common corporal/verbal punishment (past year) (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 3 541 mothers 92% 95% -3 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.30 Secondary
Common corporal/verbal punishment (past year) (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 2 549 mothers 90% 94% -4 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.34 Secondary
Common corporal/verbal punishment (past year) (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 1 558 mothers 76% 83% -7 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.26 Secondary
Extreme physical abuse (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Years 1-3 558 mothers Not available Not available OR = 1.26 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Extreme physical abuse (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 2 549 mothers 4% 4% 0 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.00 Secondary
Extreme physical abuse (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 1 558 mothers 1% 1% 0 Statistical significance not reported 0.00 Secondary
Extreme physical abuse (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 3 541 mothers 4% 2% 2 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.43 Secondary
Hitting with an object (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 3 541 mothers 28% 22% -6 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.19 Secondary
Hitting with an object (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 1 558 mothers 9% 8% 1 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.08 Secondary
Hitting with an object (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 2 549 mothers 22% 20% 2 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.07 Secondary
Hitting with an object (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Years 1-3 558 mothers Not available Not available OR = 1.22 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Hospitalizations for trauma No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Years 1-3 573 children 1.5% 1.7% 0.2 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.08 Primary
Minor physical assault (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 1 558 mothers 68% 70% -2 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.06 Secondary
Minor physical assault (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Years 1-3 558 mothers Not available Not available OR = 0.90 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Minor physical assault (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 2 549 mothers 86% 85% 1 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.05 Secondary
Minor physical assault (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 3 541 mothers 86% 86% 0 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.0 Secondary
Neglect (Revised CTS measure) (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 3 541 mothers 22% 27% -5 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.16 Secondary
Neglect (Revised CTS measure) (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 2 549 mothers 23% 28% -5 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.16 Secondary
Neglect (Revised CTS measure) (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 1 558 mothers 22% 30% -8 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.25 Secondary
Neglect (Revised CTS measure) (CTS-PC) Favorable Full sample, Hawaii trial Years 1-3 558 mothers Not available Not available OR = 0.72 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Not available Secondary
Neglect (Traditional CTS measure) (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Years 1-3 558 mothers Not available Not available OR = 0.80 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Neglect (Traditional CTS measure) (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 1 558 mothers 24% 32% -8 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.24 Secondary
Neglect (Traditional CTS measure) (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 2 549 mothers 27% 26% 1 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.03 Secondary
Neglect (Traditional CTS measure) (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 3 541 mothers 26% 29% -7 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.09 Secondary
Psychological aggression (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 3 541 mothers 88% 89% -2 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.06 Secondary
Psychological aggression (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 2 549 mothers 86% 88% -2 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.11 Secondary
Psychological aggression (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Years 1-3 558 mothers1 Not available Not available OR = 0.76 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Psychological aggression (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 1 558 mothers1 69% 74% -5 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.15 Secondary
Severe physical abuse (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 1 558 mothers 6% 4% 2 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.26 Secondary
Severe physical abuse (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Years 1-3 558 mothers Not available Not available OR = 1.30 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Severe physical abuse (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 2 549 mothers 14% 15% -1 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.05 Secondary
Severe physical abuse (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 3 541 mothers 22% 15% 7 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.28 Secondary
Shook child (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 3 541 mothers 6% 7% -1 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.10 Secondary
Shook child (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 1 558 mothers 6% 6% 0 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.00 Secondary
Shook child (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 2 549 mothers 6% 6% 0 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.00 Secondary
Shook child (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Years 1-3 558 mothers Not available Not available OR = 0.94 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Substantiated CPS reports abuse or neglect No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 2 549 mothers 0.8% 1.1% -0.3 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.19 Primary
Substantiated CPS reports abuse or neglect No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 1 558 mothers 0 0.4% -0.4 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.00 Primary
Substantiated CPS reports abuse or neglect No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 3 541 mothers 0.2% 0 0.2 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.00 Primary
Substantiated CPS reports all types No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 2 549 mothers 1.3% 2.2% -0.9 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.32 Primary
Substantiated CPS reports all types No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 1 558 mothers 0.8% 1.1% -0.3 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.19 Primary
Substantiated CPS reports all types No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 3 541 mothers 1.1% 0.7% 0.4 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.28 Primary
Substantiated CPS reports threatened abuse neglect or harm No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 2 549 mothers 1.3% 1.5% -0.2 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.09 Primary
Substantiated CPS reports threatened abuse neglect or harm No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 1 558 mothers 0.8% 1.1% -0.3 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.19 Primary
Substantiated CPS reports threatened abuse neglect or harm No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 3 541 mothers 1.1% 0.7% -0.4 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.28 Primary
Very severe physical abuse (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 3 541 mothers 6% 7% -1 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.10 Secondary
Very severe physical abuse (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 2 549 mothers 6% 6% 0 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = 0.00 Secondary
Very severe physical abuse (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, Hawaii trial Year 1 558 mothers 5% 6% -1 Statistical significance not reported HomVEE = -0.12 Secondary

1 Sample size is the largest reported across the time period.

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Description of Measure Data Collection Method Properties of the Outcome Measure Outcome Type
Conflict Tactics Scale-Parent Child (CTS-PC):
  • Psychological aggression
  • Minor physical assault
  • Severe physical abuse
  • Common corporal/verbal punishment during the past year
  • Assault on child’s self-esteem
  • Hitting with an object
  • Extreme physical abuse
  • Shook child
  • Common corporal/verbal punishment during the past week
  • Traditional neglect
  • Revised neglect
The CTS-PC assesses neglectful, psychologically aggressive, and abusive parenting behaviors and acts. The assessment is divided into six subscales: (1) nonviolent discipline, (2) psychological aggression, (3) minor physical assault, (4) severe physical assault, (5) very severe physical assault, and (6) neglect. The researchers conducted factor analysis to determine whether a different set of subscales may be more applicable to the sample. This process produced five revised subscales: (1) common corporal and verbal punishment, (2) assault on child’s self-esteem, (3) hitting with an object, (4) extreme physical violence, and (5) neglect. They assessed program impact for both the traditional and revised subscales. Parent/caregiver report Not reported by author Secondary
Hospitalizations for trauma Percentage of children who were hospitalized for trauma Review of medical records Not applicable Primary
Substantiated CPS reports, abuse or neglect Percentage of families who had a substantiated report for child abuse or neglect Review of CPS records Not applicable Primary
Substantiated CPS reports, all types Percentage of families who had a substantiated report across all child abuse or neglect classifications Review of CPS records Not applicable Primary
Substantiated CPS reports, threatened abuse, neglect or harm Percentage of families who had a substantiated report for threatened child abuse, neglect, or harm Review of CPS records Not applicable Primary

Duggan, A., Caldera, D., Rodriguez, K., Burrell, L., Rohde, C., & Crowne, S. S. (2007). Impact of a statewide home visiting program to prevent child abuse. Child Abuse & Neglect, 31(8), 801–827.
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome Effect Sample Timing of Follow-Up Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Mean Difference or Odds Ratio
Statistical Significance
Effect Size
Outcome Type
Common corporal punishment (CTS-PC) No Effect Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers 91% 92% OR = 0.80 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.08 Secondary
Common corporal punishment (CTS-PC) Favorable Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers Adjusted mean = 19.48 Adjusted mean = 24.17 MD = -4.69 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Not available Secondary
Corporal/verbal punishment (CTS-PC) No Effect Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers 66% 68% OR = 0.92 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.05 Secondary
Corporal/verbal punishment Frequency (CTS-PC) No Effect Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers Adjusted mean = 4.02 Adjusted mean = 4.57 MD = -0.55 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Extreme physical punishment (CTS-PC) No Effect Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers 2% 3% OR = 0.75 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.25 Secondary
Extreme physical punishment Frequency (CTS-PC) No Effect Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers Adjusted mean = 0.19 Adjusted mean = 0.04 MD = 0.15 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Hit with object (CTS-PC) No Effect Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers 10% 5% OR = 2.40 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.45 Secondary
Hit with object Frequency (CTS-PC) No Effect Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers Adjusted mean = 0.33 Adjusted mean = 0.46 MD = -0.13 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Mild physical assault (CTS-PC) No Effect Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers 80% 85% OR = 0.70 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.21 Secondary
Mild physical assault Frequency (CTS-PC) Favorable Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers Adjusted mean = 9.56 Adjusted mean = 11.93 MD = -2.38 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Not available Secondary
Neglectful behavior (CTS-PC) No Effect Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers 19% 22% OR = 0.81 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.11 Secondary
Neglectful behavior Frequency (CTS-PC) No Effect Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers Adjusted mean = 0.92 Adjusted mean = 0.75 MD = 0.16 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Neglectful behavior revised (CTS-PC) No Effect Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers 18% 18% OR = 0.97 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.00 Secondary
Neglectful behavior revised Frequency (CTS-PC) No Effect Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers Adjusted mean = 0.65 Adjusted mean = 0.66 MD = -0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Psychological aggression (CTS-PC) No Effect Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers 84% 83% OR = 1.10 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.04 Secondary
Psychological aggression Frequency (CTS-PC) Favorable Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers Adjusted mean = 11.17 Adjusted mean = 13.09 MD = -1.92 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Not available Secondary
Severe assault Frequency (CTS-PC) No Effect Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers Adjusted mean = 0.41 Adjusted mean = 0.3 MD = 0.10 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Severe assault (CTS-PC) No Effect Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers 9% 7% OR = 1.28 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.17 Secondary
Substantiated CPS reports, all types No Effect Full sample, Alaska trial Child age 2 297 families 9% 9% 0 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.00 Primary
Substantiated CPS reports, all types No Effect Full sample, Alaska trial Child age 1 309 families 12% 10% 2 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.12 Primary
Substantiated CPS reports, neglect No Effect Full sample, Alaska trial Child age 1 309 families 10% 6% 4 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.34 Primary
Substantiated CPS reports, neglect No Effect Full sample, Alaska trial Child age 2 297 families 6% 7% -1 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.10 Primary
Threat to esteem (CTS-PC) No Effect Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers 24% 22% OR = 1.17 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.07 Secondary
Threat to esteem Frequency (CTS-PC) No Effect Biological mothers with custody of index child at follow-up, Alaska trial Year 2 246 mothers Adjusted mean = 0.95 Adjusted mean = 0.64 MD = 0.31 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Description of Measure Data Collection Method Properties of the Outcome Measure Outcome Type
Conflict Tactics Scale-Parent Child (CTS-PC):
  • Psychological aggression
  • Mild physical assault
  • Severe assault
  • Traditional neglect
  • Common corporal punishment
  • Threat to esteem
  • Hit with object
  • Extreme physical punishment
  • Revised neglect
  • Corporal/verbal punishment
The CTS-PC assesses neglectful, psychologically aggressive, and abusive parenting behaviors and acts. The assessment is divided into six subscales: (1) nonviolent discipline, (2) psychological aggression, (3) minor physical assault, (4) severe physical assault, (5) very severe physical assault, and (6) neglect. The researchers conducted factor analysis to determine whether a different set of subscales may be more applicable to the sample. This process produced five revised subscales: (1) common corporal and verbal punishment, (2) assault on child’s self-esteem, (3) hitting with an object, (4) extreme physical violence, and (5) neglect. They assessed program impact for both the traditional and revised subscales. The researchers examined both the prevalence and frequency of these behaviors. Parent/caregiver report Not reported by author Secondary
Substantiated CPS reports, all types Percentage of families who had a substantiated report across all child abuse or neglect classifications Review of CPS records Not applicable Primary
Substantiated CPS reports, neglect Percentage of families who had a substantiated report for child neglect Review of CPS records Not applicable Primary

DuMont, K., Mitchell-Herzfeld, S., Greene, R., Lee, E., Lowenfels, A., Rodriguez, M., et al. (2008). Healthy Families New York (HFNY) randomized trial: Effects on early child abuse and neglect. Child Abuse & Neglect, 32(3), 295–315.
Additional Source:

DuMont, K., Mitchell-Herzfeld, S., Greene, R., Lee, E., Lowenfels, A., & Rodriguez, M. (2006). Healthy Families New York (HFNY)  Randomized trial: Impacts on parenting after the first two years. Unpublished manuscript.

Show Study Effects Details
Outcome Effect Sample Timing of Follow-Up Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Mean Difference or Odds Ratio
Statistical Significance
Effect Size
Outcome Type
Frequency of harsh parenting in the past week (CTS-PC) Favorable Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,060 families Adjusted mean = 1.21 Adjusted mean = 1.81 MD = -0.6 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Not available Secondary
Frequency of harsh parenting in the past week (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 2 992 families Adjusted mean = 0.27 Adjusted mean = 0.53 MD = -0.37 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Frequency of minor physical aggression (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 2 992 families Adjusted mean = 0.27 Adjusted mean = 0.53 MD = -0.19 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Frequency of minor physical aggression (CTS-PC) Favorable Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,060 families Adjusted mean = 2.40 Adjusted mean = 3.46 MD = -1.06 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Not available Secondary
Frequency of neglect (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,060 families Adjusted mean = 0.21 Adjusted mean = 0.21 MD = 0.00 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Frequency of neglect (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 2 992 families Adjusted mean = 0.27 Adjusted mean = 0.53 MD = -0.24 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Frequency of psychological aggression (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 2 992 families Adjusted mean = 0.27 Adjusted mean = 0.53 MD = -0.47 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Frequency of psychological aggression (CTS-PC) Favorable Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,060 families Adjusted mean = 3.34 Adjusted mean = 4.74 MD = -1.4 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Not available Secondary
Frequency of serious abuse and neglect (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,060 families Adjusted mean = 0.27 CI = Adjusted mean = 0.53 MD = -0.26 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Frequency of serious abuse and neglect (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 2 992 families Adjusted mean = 0.27 Adjusted mean = 0.53 MD = 0.03 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Frequency of serious physical abuse (CTS-PC) Favorable Full sample, NY Trial Year 2 992 families Adjusted mean = 0.27 Adjusted mean = 0.53 MD = -0.03 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Not available Secondary
Frequency of serious physical abuse (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,060 families Adjusted mean = 0.01 Adjusted mean = 0.01 MD = 0.00 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Frequency of very serious physical abuse (CTS-PC) Favorable Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,060 families Adjusted mean = 0.01 Adjusted mean = 0.08 MD = -0.07 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Not available Secondary
Frequency of very serious physical abuse (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 2 992 families Adjusted mean = 0.27 Adjusted mean = 0.53 MD = 0.00 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Harsh parenting in the past week (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,060 families 32.67% (adjusted) 36.12% (adjusted) -3.45 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Harsh parenting in the past week (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 2 992 families 53.12% (adjusted) 54.58% (adjusted) -1.46 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Minor physical aggression (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 2 992 families 64.50% (adjusted) 64.55% (adjusted) -0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Minor physical aggression (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,060 families 39.60% (adjusted) 44.42% (adjusted) -4.82 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Neglect (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,060 families 5.52% (adjusted) 8.27% (adjusted) -2.75 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Neglect (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 2 992 families 8.09% (adjusted) 7.18% (adjusted) 0.91 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Number of substantiated abuse or neglect reports No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 2 992 families Adjusted mean = 0.27 Adjusted mean = 0.53 MD = 0.00 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Primary
Number of substantiated abuse or neglect reports No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,060 families Adjusted mean = 0.09 Adjusted mean = 0.07 MD = 0.02 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Primary
Psychological aggression (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,060 families 51.18% (adjusted) 56.13% (adjusted) -4.95 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Psychological aggression (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 2 992 families 76.44% (adjusted) 77.74% (adjusted) -1.30 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Serious abuse and neglect (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,060 families 5.67% (adjusted) 7.28% (adjusted) -1.61 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Serious abuse and neglect (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 2 992 families 6.78% (adjusted) 7.83% (adjusted) -1.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Serious physical abuse (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,060 families 0.85% (adjusted) 0.81% 0.04 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Serious physical abuse (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 2 992 families 0.60% (adjusted) 1.21% (adjusted) -0.61 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Substantiated abuse or neglect report No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 2 992 families 5.08% (adjusted) 4.80% (adjusted) 0.28 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Primary
Substantiated abuse or neglect report No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,060 families 7.90% (adjusted) 5.98% (adjusted) 1.92 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Primary
Very serious physical abuse (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 2 992 families 2.62% (adjusted) 2.85% (adjusted) -0.23 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Very serious physical abuse (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,060 families 0.93% (adjusted) 1.33% (adjusted) -0.4 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Description of Measure Data Collection Method Properties of the Outcome Measure Outcome Type
Conflict Tactics Scale-Parent Child (CTS-PC):
  • Serious abuse and neglect
  • Very serious physical abuse
  • Serious physical abuse
  • Minor physical aggression
  • Psychological aggression
  • Neglect
  • Harsh parenting in the past week
The CTS-PC assesses neglectful, psychologically aggressive, and abusive parenting behaviors and acts. Mothers were asked how often they engaged in 27 different behaviors in the past year as well as five questions about parenting in the past week. The CTS-PC has a number of subscales: neglect, psychological aggression, nonviolent discipline, minor physical aggression, severe abuse, and very severe abuse in the past year; and harsh parenting in the past week. The researchers excluded the nonviolent discipline subscale and formed a composite scale of the 11 most serious items to represent the acts that likely would have resulted in a substantiated report had CPS been notified. The researchers used the instrument to examine both the prevalence and frequency of the behaviors. Parent/caregiver report Not reported by author Secondary
Substantiated abuse or neglect reports The prevalence and frequency of substantiated reports of child abuse or neglect Review of CPS records Not reported by author Primary

DuMont, K., Kirkland, K., Mitchell-Herzfeld, S., Ehrhard-Dietzel, S., Rodriguez, M. L., Lee, E., Layne, C., & Greene, R. (2010). “A randomized trial of Healthy Families New York (HFNY): Does home visiting prevent child maltreatment?” Rensselaer, NY: New York State Office of Children & Family Services and Albany, NY: The University of Albany, State University of New York, 2010.
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome Effect Sample Timing of Follow-Up Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Mean Difference or Odds Ratio
Statistical Significance
Effect Size
Outcome Type
Biological mother confirmed subject, cumulative number No Effect New York sample 7 year 1,173 mothers Adjusted mean = 0.42 Adjusted mean = 0.42 MD = 0.00 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Study-reported = 0 Primary
Biological mother confirmed subject—neglect, cumulative rate No Effect New York sample 7 year 1,173 mothers Adjusted mean = 22.96% Adjusted mean = 20.68% OR = 1.14 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Primary
Biological mother confirmed subject—physical abuse, cumulative rate No Effect New York sample 7 year 1,173 mothers Adjusted mean = 4.47% Adjusted mean = 4.24% OR = 1.06 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Primary
Biological mother confirmed subject—sexual abuse, cumulative rate Favorable New York sample 7 year 1,173 mothers Mean = 0% Mean = 0.7% OR = 0.00 Statistically significant, p < 0.05 Not available Primary
Biological mother or target child confirmed subject or victim of CPS report, cumulative number No Effect New York sample 7 year 1,173 mothers Adjusted mean = 0.54 Adjusted mean = 0.55 MD = -0.01 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Study-reported = -0.01 Primary
Biological mother or target child confirmed subject or victim of CPS report, cumulative rate No Effect New York sample 7 year 1,173 mothers Adjusted mean = 29.55% Adjusted mean = 27.1% OR = 1.13 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Primary
Foster care placement—target child, cumulative rate No Effect New York sample 7 year 1,173 mothers Adjusted mean = 4.83% Adjusted mean = 4.9% OR = 0.99 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Primary
Minor physical aggression frequency(CTS-PC) No Effect New York sample 7 year 897 mothers Adjusted mean = 4.36 Adjusted mean = 4.51 MD = -0.15 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Study-reported = -0.02 Secondary
Minor physical aggression prevalence(CTS-PC) No Effect New York sample 7 year 897 mothers Adjusted man = 64.12% Adjusted mean = 59.17% OR = 1.25 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Secondary
Neglect frequency(CTS-PC) No Effect New York sample 7 year 897 mothers Adjusted mean = 0.53 Adjusted mean = 0.64 MD = -0.11 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Study-reported = 0.05 Secondary
Neglect prevalence(CTS-PC) No Effect New York sample 7 year 897 mothers Adjusted mean = 15.77% Adjusted mean = 16.74% OR = 0.93 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Secondary
Non-violent discipline frequency(CTS-PC) Favorable New York sample 7 year 897 mothers Adjusted mean = 49.27 Adjusted mean = 45.27 MD = 4.00 Statistically significant, p < 0.05 Study-reported = 0.14 Secondary
Non-violent discipline prevalence)(CTS-PC) No Effect New York sample 7 year 897 mothers Unadjusted mean = 100% Unadjusted mean = 98.6% MD = 1.4 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Secondary
Psychological aggression frequency(CTS-PC) No Effect New York sample 7 year 897 mothers Adjusted mean = 15.33 Adjusted mean = 15.21 MD = 0.12 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Study-reported = 0.01 Secondary
Psychological aggression prevalence(CTS-PC) No Effect New York sample 7 year 897 mothers Adjusted mean = 87.92% Adjusted mean = 86.49% OR = 1.18 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Secondary
Serious physical abuse frequency(CTS-PC) Favorable New York sample 7 year 897 mothers Adjusted mean = 0.03 Adjusted mean = 0.15 MD = -0.12 Statistically significant, p < 0.05 Study-reported = -0.2 Secondary
Serious physical aggressionprevalence (CTS-PC) No Effect New York sample 7 year 897 mothers Adjusted mean = 1.76% Adjusted mean = 3.18% OR = 0.55 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Secondary
Target child confirmed victim, cumulative number No Effect New York sample 7 year 1,173 mothers Adjusted mean = 0.39 Adjusted mean = 0.41 MD = -0.02 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Study-reported = -0.02 Primary
Target child confirmed victim—neglect, cumulative rate No Effect New York sample 7 year 1,173 mothers Adjusted mean = 24.29% Adjusted mean = 22.95% OR = 1.08 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Primary
Target child confirmed victim—physical abuse, cumulative rate No Effect New York sample 7 year 1,173 mothers Adjusted mean = 4.09% Adjusted mean = 3.05% OR = 1.36 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Primary
Target child confirmed victim—sexual abuse, cumulative rate No Effect New York sample 7 year 1,173 mothers Mean = 0.2% Mean = 0.7% OR = 0.26 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Primary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Description of Measure Data Collection Method Properties of the Outcome Measure Outcome Type
Biological mother confirmed subject, cumulative number The cumulative number of biological mothers that were a confirmed subject of a CPS report from random assignment to target child’s seventh birthday  Review of CPS records Not applicable Primary
Biological mother confirmed subject—neglect, cumulative rate The cumulative percentage of biological mothers that were a confirmed subject of a child neglect CPS report from random assignment to target child’s seventh birthday  Review of CPS records Not applicable Primary
Biological mother confirmed subject—physical abuse, cumulative rate The cumulative percentage of biological mothers that were a confirmed subject of a physical abuse CPS report from random assignment to target child’s seventh birthday  Review of CPS records Not applicable Primary
Biological mother or target child confirmed subject or victim of CPS report, cumulative number The cumulative number of biological mothers or target children that were a confirmed subject of a CPS report from random assignment to target child’s seventh birthday  Review of CPS records Not applicable Primary
Biological mother or target child confirmed subject or victim of CPS report, cumulative rate The cumulative percentage of biological mothers or target children that were a confirmed subject of a CPS report from random assignment to target child’s seventh birthday  Review of CPS records Not applicable Primary
Foster care placement—target child, cumulative rate The cumulative percentage of children that were placed in foster care from random assignment to target child’s seventh birthday  Review of CPS records Not applicable Primary
Minor physical aggression frequency(CTS-PC) CTS -PC is a 27-item instrument designed to assess parenting practices. The authors used subscales that described the prevalence or frequency of parenting behaviors during the previous year, including non-violent discipline, psychological aggression, minor physical aggression, serious physical abuse, and neglect. The CTS -PCV consists of pictures depicting parenting behavior and acts of maltreatment. The pictures were accompanied by an audio description of the depicted act and a question asking the child if his/her mother has ever treated him/her that way. The instrument was restricted to pictures that depict non-violent discipline strategies, psychological aggression, and minor physical aggression. Scores were used to indicate the frequency and/or prevalence of a child’s experience of specific parenting practices. Parent/caregiver report Not reported by author  Primary
Minor physical aggression prevalence(CTS-PC) CTS -PC is a 27-item instrument designed to assess parenting practices. The authors used subscales that described the prevalence or frequency of parenting behaviors during the previous year, including non-violent discipline, psychological aggression, minor physical aggression, serious physical abuse, and neglect. The CTS -PCV consists of pictures depicting parenting behavior and acts of maltreatment. The pictures were accompanied by an audio description of the depicted act and a question asking the child if his/her mother has ever treated him/her that way. The instrument was restricted to pictures that depict non-violent discipline strategies, psychological aggression, and minor physical aggression. Scores were used to indicate the frequency and/or prevalence of a child’s experience of specific parenting practices. Parent/caregiver report Not reported by author  Primary
Neglect frequency(CTS-PC) CTS -PC is a 27-item instrument designed to assess parenting practices. The authors used subscales that described the prevalence or frequency of parenting behaviors during the previous year, including non-violent discipline, psychological aggression, minor physical aggression, serious physical abuse, and neglect. The CTS -PCV consists of pictures depicting parenting behavior and acts of maltreatment. The pictures were accompanied by an audio description of the depicted act and a question asking the child if his/her mother has ever treated him/her that way. The instrument was restricted to pictures that depict non-violent discipline strategies, psychological aggression, and minor physical aggression. Scores were used to indicate the frequency and/or prevalence of a child’s experience of specific parenting practices. Parent/caregiver report Not reported by author  Primary
Neglect prevalence(CTS-PC) CTS -PC is a 27-item instrument designed to assess parenting practices. The authors used subscales that described the prevalence or frequency of parenting behaviors during the previous year, including non-violent discipline, psychological aggression, minor physical aggression, serious physical abuse, and neglect. The CTS -PCV consists of pictures depicting parenting behavior and acts of maltreatment. The pictures were accompanied by an audio description of the depicted act and a question asking the child if his/her mother has ever treated him/her that way. The instrument was restricted to pictures that depict non-violent discipline strategies, psychological aggression, and minor physical aggression. Scores were used to indicate the frequency and/or prevalence of a child’s experience of specific parenting practices. Parent/caregiver report Not reported by author  Primary
Non-violent discipline frequency(CTS-PC) CTS -PC is a 27-item instrument designed to assess parenting practices. The authors used subscales that described the prevalence or frequency of parenting behaviors during the previous year, including non-violent discipline, psychological aggression, minor physical aggression, serious physical abuse, and neglect. The CTS -PCV consists of pictures depicting parenting behavior and acts of maltreatment. The pictures were accompanied by an audio description of the depicted act and a question asking the child if his/her mother has ever treated him/her that way. The instrument was restricted to pictures that depict non-violent discipline strategies, psychological aggression, and minor physical aggression. Scores were used to indicate the frequency and/or prevalence of a child’s experience of specific parenting practices. Parent/caregiver report Not reported by author  Primary
Psychological aggression frequency(CTS-PC) CTS -PC is a 27-item instrument designed to assess parenting practices. The authors used subscales that described the prevalence or frequency of parenting behaviors during the previous year, including non-violent discipline, psychological aggression, minor physical aggression, serious physical abuse, and neglect. The CTS -PCV consists of pictures depicting parenting behavior and acts of maltreatment. The pictures were accompanied by an audio description of the depicted act and a question asking the child if his/her mother has ever treated him/her that way. The instrument was restricted to pictures that depict non-violent discipline strategies, psychological aggression, and minor physical aggression. Scores were used to indicate the frequency and/or prevalence of a child’s experience of specific parenting practices. Parent/caregiver report Not reported by author  Primary
Psychological aggression prevalence(CTS-PC) CTS -PC is a 27-item instrument designed to assess parenting practices. The authors used subscales that described the prevalence or frequency of parenting behaviors during the previous year, including non-violent discipline, psychological aggression, minor physical aggression, serious physical abuse, and neglect. The CTS -PCV consists of pictures depicting parenting behavior and acts of maltreatment. The pictures were accompanied by an audio description of the depicted act and a question asking the child if his/her mother has ever treated him/her that way. The instrument was restricted to pictures that depict non-violent discipline strategies, psychological aggression, and minor physical aggression. Scores were used to indicate the frequency and/or prevalence of a child’s experience of specific parenting practices. Parent/caregiver report Not reported by author  Primary
Serious physical abuse frequency(CTS-PC) CTS -PC is a 27-item instrument designed to assess parenting practices. The authors used subscales that described the prevalence or frequency of parenting behaviors during the previous year, including non-violent discipline, psychological aggression, minor physical aggression, serious physical abuse, and neglect. The CTS -PCV consists of pictures depicting parenting behavior and acts of maltreatment. The pictures were accompanied by an audio description of the depicted act and a question asking the child if his/her mother has ever treated him/her that way. The instrument was restricted to pictures that depict non-violent discipline strategies, psychological aggression, and minor physical aggression. Scores were used to indicate the frequency and/or prevalence of a child’s experience of specific parenting practices. Parent/caregiver report Not reported by author  Primary
Serious physical aggressionprevalence (CTS-PC) CTS -PC is a 27-item instrument designed to assess parenting practices. The authors used subscales that described the prevalence or frequency of parenting behaviors during the previous year, including non-violent discipline, psychological aggression, minor physical aggression, serious physical abuse, and neglect. The CTS -PCV consists of pictures depicting parenting behavior and acts of maltreatment. The pictures were accompanied by an audio description of the depicted act and a question asking the child if his/her mother has ever treated him/her that way. The instrument was restricted to pictures that depict non-violent discipline strategies, psychological aggression, and minor physical aggression. Scores were used to indicate the frequency and/or prevalence of a child’s experience of specific parenting practices. Parent/caregiver report Not reported by author  Primary
Target child confirmed victim, cumulative number The cumulative number of children that were the confirmed victim in an indicated CPS investigation from random assignment to target child’s seventh birthday Review of CPS records  Not applicable Primary
Target child confirmed victim—neglect, cumulative rate The cumulative percentage of children that were the confirmed victim in an indicated CPS neglect investigation from random assignment to target child’s seventh birthday Review of CPS records  Not applicable Primary
Target child confirmed victim—physical abuse, cumulative rate The cumulative percentage of children that were the confirmed victim in an indicated CPS physical abuse investigation from random assignment to target child’s seventh birthday Review of CPS records  Not applicable Primary

Landsverk, J., Carrilio, T., Connelly, C. D., Ganger, W., Slymen, D., Newton, R., et al. (2002). Healthy Families San Diego clinical trial: Technical report. San Diego, CA: The Stuart Foundation, California Wellness Foundation, State of California Department of Social Services: Office of Child Abuse Prevention.
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome Effect Sample Timing of Follow-Up Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Mean Difference or Odds Ratio
Statistical Significance
Effect Size
Outcome Type
Any neglect (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, San Diego trial Year 3 382 families 18% 21% 3 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.12 Secondary
Any neglect (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, San Diego trial Year 1 422 families 24% 22% 2 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.07 Secondary
Mild physical assault frequency (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, San Diego trial Year 1 422 families Mean = 2.1
SD = 2.9
Mean = 2.3
SD = 3.1
MD = -0.2 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.07 Secondary
Mild physical assault frequency (CTS-PC) Favorable Full sample, San Diego trial Year 3 382 families Mean = 3.4
SD = 3.7
Mean = 4.6
SD = 4.4
MD = -1.2 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
HomVEE = -0.29 Secondary
Mild physical assault prevalence (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, San Diego trial Year 3 382 families 70% 78% -8 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.25 Secondary
Mild physical assault prevalence (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, San Diego trial Year 1 422 families 51% 54% 3 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.07 Secondary
Physical abuse frequency (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, San Diego trial Year 3 382 families Mean = 0.13
SD = 0.7
Mean = 0.46
SD = 2.2
MD = -0.33 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.20 Secondary
Physical abuse frequency (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, San Diego trial Year 1 422 families Mean = 0.17
SD = 1.0
Mean = 0.26
SD = 1.2
MD = -0.09 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.08 Secondary
Physical abuse prevalence No Effect Full sample, San Diego trial Year 1 422 families 6% 10% -4 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.34 Secondary
Physical abuse prevalence (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, San Diego trial Year 3 382 families 5% 10% -5 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.45 Secondary
Psychological aggression frequency (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, San Diego trial Year 1 422 families Mean = 2.7
SD = 3.3
Mean = 3.2
SD = 3.8
MD = -0.5 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.14 Secondary
Psychological aggression frequency (CTS-PC) Favorable Full sample, San Diego trial Year 3 382 families Mean = 4.8
SD = 4.3
Mean = 6.0
SD = 4.5
MD = -1.2 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
HomVEE = -0.27 Secondary
Psychological aggression prevalence (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, San Diego trial Year 3 382 families 79% 85% 6 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.25 Secondary
Psychological aggression prevalence (CTS-PC) No Effect Full sample, San Diego trial Year 1 422 families 59% 63% 4 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.10 Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Description of Measure Data Collection Method Properties of the Outcome Measure Outcome Type
Conflict Tactics Scale-Parent Child (CTS-PC):
  • Neglect
  • Psychological aggression
  • Mild physical assault
  • Physical abuse
The CTS-PC assesses neglectful, psychologically aggressive, and abusive parenting behaviors and acts. The researchers examined the frequency and prevalence of psychological aggression, mild physical assault, and physical abuse and the prevalence of neglect. Parent/caregiver report Not reported by author Secondary
Top

Impact Studies Rated Moderate


Easterbrooks, M. A., Jacobs, F. H., Bartlett, J. D., Goldberg, J., Contreras, M. M., Kotake, C., Raskin, M. & Chaudhuri, J. H. (2012). Initial findings from a randomized, controlled trial of Healthy Families Massachusetts: Early program impacts on young mothers' parenting. Report to the Pew Center on the States. Medford, MA: Tufts University.
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome Effect Sample Timing of Follow-Up Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Mean Difference or Odds Ratio
Statistical Significance
Effect Size
Outcome Type
Substantiated child maltreatment by any perpetrator: any type of maltreatment (DCF reports) - Impact sample No Effect HFM Impact sample 1 year post-enrollment 687 Not reported Not reported Not reported Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not reported Primary
Substantiated child maltreatment by any perpetrator: neglect and physical abuse (DCF reports) - Impact sample No Effect HFM Impact sample 1 year post-enrollment 687 Not reported Not reported Not reported Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not reported Primary
Substantiated child maltreatment by any perpetrator: neglect only (DCF reports) - Impact sample No Effect HFM Impact sample 1 year post-enrollment 687 Not reported Not reported Not reported Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not reported Primary
Substantiated child maltreatment by any perpetrator: physical abuse only (DCF reports) - Impact sample No Effect HFM Impact sample 1 year post-enrollment 687 Not reported Not reported Not reported Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not reported Primary
Substantiated child maltreatment by any perpetrator: total substantiations (DCF reports) - Impact sample No Effect HFM Impact sample 1 year post-enrollment 687 Not reported Not reported Not reported Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not reported Primary
Substantiated child maltreatment, mother perpetrated: any type of maltreatment (DCF reports) - Impact sample No Effect HFM Impact sample 1 year post-enrollment 687 Not reported Not reported Not reported Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not reported Primary
Substantiated child maltreatment, mother perpetrated: neglect and physical abuse (DCF reports) - Impact sample No Effect HFM Impact sample 1 year post-enrollment 687 Not reported Not reported Not reported Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not reported Primary
Substantiated child maltreatment, mother perpetrated: neglect only (DCF reports) - Impact sample No Effect HFM Impact sample 1 year post-enrollment 687 Not reported Not reported Not reported Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not reported Primary
Substantiated child maltreatment, mother perpetrated: physical abuse only (DCF reports) - Impact sample No Effect HFM Impact sample 1 year post-enrollment 687 Not reported Not reported Not reported Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not reported Primary
Substantiated child maltreatment, mother perpetrated: total substantiations (DCF reports) - Impact sample No Effect HFM Impact sample 1 year post-enrollment 687 Not reported Not reported Not reported Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not reported Primary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Description of Measure Data Collection Method Properties of the Outcome Measure Outcome Type
Substantiated child maltreatment by any perpetrator: any type of maltreatment (DCF reports) - Impact sample Proportion of children who had at least one substantiated report of physical abuse and/or neglect, committed by any perpetrator Administrative records (DCF reports) Not applicable Primary
Substantiated child maltreatment by any perpetrator: neglect and physical abuse (DCF reports) - Impact sample Proportion of children who had at least one substantiated report each of physical abuse and neglect, committed by any perpetrator Administrative records (DCF reports) Not applicable Primary
Substantiated child maltreatment by any perpetrator: neglect only (DCF reports) - Impact sample Proportion of children who had at least one substantiated report of neglect, committed by any perpetrator Administrative records (DCF reports) Not applicable Primary
Substantiated child maltreatment by any perpetrator: physical abuse only (DCF reports) - Impact sample Proportion of children who had at least one substantiated report of physical abuse, committed by any perpetrator Administrative records (DCF reports) Not applicable Primary
Substantiated child maltreatment by any perpetrator: total substantiations (DCF reports) - Impact sample Average number of substantiated reports of physical abuse and neglect, committed by any perpetrator Administrative records (DCF reports) Not applicable Primary
Substantiated child maltreatment, mother perpetrated: any type of maltreatment (DCF reports) - Impact sample Proportion of children who had at least one substantiated report of physical abuse and/or neglect, committed by the mother alone or with another caregiver Administrative records (DCF reports) Not applicable Primary
Substantiated child maltreatment, mother perpetrated: neglect and physical abuse (DCF reports) - Impact sample Proportion of children who had at least one substantiated report each of physical abuse and neglect, committed by the mother alone or with another caregiver Administrative records (DCF reports) Not applicable Primary
Substantiated child maltreatment, mother perpetrated: neglect only (DCF reports) - Impact sample Proportion of children who had at least one substantiated report of neglect, committed by the mother alone or with another caregiver Administrative records (DCF reports) Not applicable Primary
Substantiated child maltreatment, mother perpetrated: physical abuse only (DCF reports) - Impact sample Proportion of children who had at least one substantiated report of physical abuse, committed by the mother alone or with another caregiver Administrative records (DCF reports) Not applicable Primary
Substantiated child maltreatment, mother perpetrated: total substantiations (DCF reports) - Impact sample Average number of substantiated reports of physical abuse and neglect, committed by the mother alone or with another caregiver Administrative records (DCF reports) Not applicable Primary

Jacobs, F., Easterbrooks, M. A., Goldberg, J., Mistry, J., Bumgarner, E., Raskin, M., Fosse, N., & Fauth, R. (2015). Improving adolescent parenting: Results from a randomized controlled trial of a home visiting program for young families. American Journal of Public Health, published online ahead of print, e1-e7.
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome Effect Sample Timing of Follow-Up Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Mean Difference or Odds Ratio
Statistical Significance
Effect Size
Outcome Type
Substantiated maltreatment (administrative data) No Effect MA sample within 27 months post-enrollment 690 children Not reported Not reported OR = 0.88 Not statistically significant, p = 0.59 HomVEE = -0.08 Primary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Description of Measure Data Collection Method Properties of the Outcome Measure Outcome Type
Substantiated maltreatment (administrative data) Percentage of target children who had a substantiated report of maltreatment Administrative records from child protective services Not applicable Primary

Mitchell-Herzfeld, S., Izzo, C., Greene, R., Lee, E., & Lowenfels, A. (2005). Evaluation of Healthy Families New York (HFNY): First year program impacts. Albany, NY: University at Albany, Center for Human Services Research.
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome Effect Sample Timing of Follow-Up Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Mean Difference or Odds Ratio
Statistical Significance
Effect Size
Outcome Type
ER visits due to injury or ingestion No Effect Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,061 children 3.8% 6.2% -2.4 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.31 Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Description of Measure Data Collection Method Properties of the Outcome Measure Outcome Type
ER visits due to injury or ingestion Percentage of children who, had at least one ER visit that involved injury or ingestion Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Top