Skip Navigation

Parents as Teachers (PAT)®

Meets DHHS criteria for an evidenced based model

Last Updated: July 2013

In Brief for Family Economic Self-Sufficiency Outcomes

Impact Studies Rated High


Wagner, M., Clayton, S., Gerlach-Downie, S., & McElroy, M. (1999). An evaluation of the northern California Parents as Teachers demonstration. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
Additional Source:

Wagner, M. & Clayton, S. (1999). The Parents as Teachers program: Results from two demonstrations. The Future of Children, 9(1), 91-115.

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 postsecondary education No Effect Northern California sample 2 year 363 mothers 27% 33.1% -6.1 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.18 Secondary
Any postsecondary education No Effect Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers 29.3% 38.8% -9.5 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
1
HomVEE = -0.26 Secondary
Attending school in the past year No Effect Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers 25.8% 23.5% 3.3 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.08 Secondary
Attending school in the past year No Effect Northern California sample 2 year 363 mothers 27.7% 30.7% -3.0 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.09 Secondary
Average highest grade level No Effect Northern California sample 2 year 363 mothers Mean = 10.5 Mean = 11.2 MD = -0.7 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Average highest grade level No Effect Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers Mean = 10.8 Mean = 11.6 MD = -0.8 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Not available Secondary
Father living in household No Effect Northern California sample 2 year 371 mothers 77.6% 81% -3.4 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.13 Secondary
Father living in household No Effect Northern California sample 3 year 343 mothers 78.8% 80.8% -2.0 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.08 Secondary
High school graduate No Effect Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers 24.5% 20.4% 4.1 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.14 Secondary
High school graduate No Effect Northern California sample 2 year 363 mothers 23.2% 22.7% 0.5 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.02 Secondary
Household income $10000 - $29999 No Effect Northern California sample 2 year 366 mothers 57.9% 44.9% 13.0 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
1
HomVEE = 0.32 Secondary
Household income $10000 - $29999 No Effect Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers 55.3% 7.9 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.19 Secondary
Household income $30000 or more Unfavorable Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers 25.3% 36.8% -11.5 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
HomVEE = -0.33 Secondary
Household income $30000 or more No Effect Northern California sample 2 year 366 mothers 22.6% 33.6% -11.0 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
1
HomVEE = -0.33 Secondary
Household income less than $10000 No Effect Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers 19.3% 15.8% 3.5 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.15 Secondary
Household income less than $10000 No Effect Northern California sample 2 year 366 mothers 19.5% 21.5% -2.0 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.07 Secondary
Household receiving AFDC No Effect Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers 15.4% 17.9% -2.5 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.11 Secondary
Household receiving AFDC No Effect Northern California sample 2 year 366 mothers 16.1% 22.2% -6.1 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
1
HomVEE = -0.24 Secondary
Household receiving Medi-Cal No Effect Northern California sample 2 year 366 mothers 39.9% 45.1% -5.2 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.13 Secondary
Household receiving Medi-Cal No Effect Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers 37% 36.4% 0.6 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.02 Secondary
Less than high school No Effect Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers 46.2% 40.8% 5.4 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.13 Secondary
Less than high school No Effect Northern California sample 2 year 363 mothers 49.8% 44.2% 5.6 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.14 Secondary
Married No Effect Northern California sample 3 year 343 mothers 67.2% 68.7% -1.5 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.04 Secondary
Married No Effect Northern California sample 2 year 371 mothers 66.1% 67.6% -1.5 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.04 Secondary
Married two- parent household No Effect Northern California sample 2 year 371 mothers 61.9% 65.5% -3.6 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.09 Secondary
Married two- parent household No Effect Northern California sample 3 year 343 mothers 64.6% 67.8% -3.2 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.09 Secondary
Mother working/in job training No Effect Northern California sample 2 year 366 mothers 48.8% 36.2% 12.6 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
1
HomVEE = 0.31 Secondary
Mother working/in job training No Effect Northern California sample 3 year 354 mothers 55.4% 46% 9.4 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
1
HomVEE = 0.23 Secondary
Sole-adult household No Effect Northern California sample 2 year 371 mothers 10% 5.2% 4.8 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.00 Secondary
Sole-adult household No Effect Northern California sample 3 year 343 mothers 10.1% 10.6% -0.5 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.03 Secondary

1 In contrast to the study-reported results, HomVEE calculations showed this difference to be statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05). The HomVEE tests of statistical significance are based on the HomVEE calculated effect sizes, whereas authors may have used other techniques to determine statistical significance, such as regression models or analyses of variance (ANOVA).

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Description of Measure Data Collection Method Properties of the Outcome Measure Outcome Type
Any postsecondary education Percentage of mothers who had some postsecondary education Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Attending school in the past year Percentage of mothers who attended school in the past year Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Average highest grade level An average of the highest level of school that the mother had completed Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Father living in household Percentage of fathers who lived in the same household as the study’s focal child Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
High school graduate Percentage of mothers who had completed high school Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Household income $10,000–$29,999 Percentage of households with incomes between $10,000 and $29,000 Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Household income $30,000 or more Percentage of households with incomes of $30,000 or greater Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Household income less than $10,000 Percentage of households with incomes less than $10,000 Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Household receiving AFDC Percentage of households that received AFDC Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Household receiving Medi-Cal Percentage of households that received Medi-Cal Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Less than high school Percentage of mothers who had less than a high school education Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Married Percentage of mothers who were married Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Married, two-parent household Percentage of households in which there were two married parents Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Mother working/in job training Percentage of mothers who were working or in job training Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Sole-adult household Percentage of households in which the mother was the only adult Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Top

Impact Studies Rated Moderate


Campbell, K. I., & Silva, P. A. (1997). Parents as first teachers pilot programme evaluation : Age three assessments. Final report to the ministry of education on the Dunedin and Gisborne/East coast areas. Wellington: Ministry of Education.
Results for Parents as First Teachers (New Zealand)
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
Attained additional educational qualifications since birth of child No Effect Dunedin 3 years 207 mothers Unadjusted % = 0.23 Unadjusted % = 0.3 MD = -0.07 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 HomVEE = -0.22 Secondary
Elley-Irving Socio-Economic Index No Effect Dunedin sample 3 years 208 mothers Not available Not available Not available Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Secondary
Family composition No Effect Dunedin sample 3 years 208 mothers Not available Not available Not available Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Secondary
Family means of transport No Effect Dunedin sample 3 years 208 mothers Not available Not available Not available Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Secondary
Family owns car No Effect Dunedin sample 3 years 208 mothers Unadjusted % = 0.88 Unadjusted % = 0.9 MD = -0.02 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 HomVEE = -0.12 Secondary
Family Strains Questionnaire, Sum of strains No Effect Dunedin sample 3 years 206 mothers Unadjusted mean = 10.92 Unadjusted mean = 9.97 MD = 0.951 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 HomVEE = 0.12 Secondary
Family Stressors Questionnaire, Sum of stressors No Effect Dunedin sample 3 years 206 mothers Unadjusted mean = 15.42 Unadjusted mean = 14.54 MD = 0.88 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 HomVEE = 0.1 Secondary
Family type No Effect Dunedin sample 3 years 208 mothers Not available Not available Not available Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Secondary
Father in paid employment No Effect Dunedin sample 3 years 208 mothers Unadjusted % = 0.85 Unadjusted % = 0.84 MD = 0.01 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 HomVEE = 0.05 Secondary
Held a community services card No Effect Dunedin sample 3 years 208 mothers Unadjusted % = 0.39 Unadjusted % = 0.42 MD = -0.03 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 HomVEE = -0.08 Secondary
In a "married" relationship No Effect Dunedin sample 3 years 208 mothers Unadjusted % = 0.8 Unadjusted % = 0.87 MD = -0.07 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 HomVEE = -0.31 Secondary
Language use in the home No Effect Dunedin sample 3 years 208 mothers Not available Not available Not available Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Secondary
Live-in partner No Effect Dunedin sample 3 years 208 mothers Unadjusted % = 0.86 Unadjusted % = 0.87 MD = -0.01 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 HomVEE = -0.05 Secondary
Mother working in full-time position Unfavorable Dunedin sample 3 years 208 mothers Unadjusted % = 0.35 Unadjusted % = 0.53 MD = -0.182 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 HomVEE = -0.45 Secondary
Mother working in paid employment No Effect Dunedin sample 3 years 208 mothers Unadjusted % = 0.64 Unadjusted % = 0.56 MD = 0.08 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 HomVEE = 0.2 Secondary
Number of hours father figure employed per week No Effect Dunedin sample 3 years 208 mothers Not available Not available Not available Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Secondary
Receiving government support No Effect Dunedin sample 3 years 208 mothers Unadjusted % = 0.42 Unadjusted % = 0.39 MD = 0.03 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 HomVEE = 0.08 Secondary
Solo parenting No Effect Dunedin sample 3 years 208 mothers Unadjusted % = 0.2 Unadjusted % = 0.13 MD = 0.07 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 HomVEE = 0.31 Secondary
Subjective perception of income level No Effect Dunedin sample 3 years 207 mothers Not available Not available Not available Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Secondary
Type of accomodation No Effect Dunedin sample 3 years 208 mothers Not available Not available Not available Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Not available Secondary

1 Authors report that significantly more program group families reported experiencing increased strain on family money for medical expenses, clothes, food, etc., but, after applying the Bonferroni inequality, this difference was no longer significant.

2 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Description of Measure Data Collection Method Properties of the Outcome Measure Outcome Type
Attained additional educational qualifications since birth of child Number/percentage of mothers who attained additional educational qualifications since birth of their child Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Elley-Irving Socio-Economic Index Distribution of socio-economic status (Level 1 & 2, Level 3 & 4, Level 5 or 6, Other), as defined by the Elley-Irving Socio-Economic Index. Parent/caregiver report Not reported by authors Secondary
Family composition Categorical variable for household size Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Family means of transport Distribution of families' means of transport Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Family owns car Number/percentage of families that owned a car Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Family Strains Questionnaire, Sum of strains Mean sum of strains parents experienced Parent/caregiver report Not reported by authors Secondary
Family Stressors Questionnaire, Sum of stressors Mean sum of stressors parents experienced Parent/caregiver report Not reported by authors Secondary
Family type Number/percentage of children who lived in a "nuclear family" arrangement Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Father in paid employment Number/percentage of fathers working in paid employment Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Held a community services card Number/percentage of families that held a Community Services Card Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
In a "married" relationship Number/percentage of mothers in a married relationship Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Language use in the home Distribution of languages families spoke at home Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Live-in partner Number/percentage of mothers whose partner lived with the family Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Mother working in full-time position Number/percentage of mothers working in full-time positions Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Mother working in paid employment Number/percentage of mothers working in paid employment Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Number of hours father figure employed per week Percent distribution of the number of hours father figures worked per week, categorized as less than 41 hours per week, 41-50 hours per week, or more than 50 hours per week. Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Receiving government support Number/percentage of families receiving government support Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Solo parenting Number/percentage of mothers who were separated, divorced, or single Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Subjective perception of income level Distribution of mothers' perception of their income levels, categorized as top or second to top, middle to average, or lower Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Type of accomodation Distribution of families' housing type Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary

Drazen, S. M., & Haust, M. (1993, August). Raising reading readiness in low-income children by parent education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association.
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
Change in AFDC Status Favorable Binghamton, NY 4-5 years 40 children Unadjusted mean = -0.10 Unadjusted mean = 0.20 MD = -0.30 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
Change in AFDC Status Difference in percentage of families who received AFDC when children were age 1 and when children were age 4 or 5 Department of Social Services records Not applicable Primary

Wagner, M., Cameto, R., & Gerlach-Downie, S. (1996). Intervention in support of adolescent parents and their children: A final report on the Teen Parents as Teachers Demonstration. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
Additional Source:

Wagner, M. & Clayton, S. (1999). The Parents as Teachers program: Results from two demonstrations. The Future of Children, 9(1), 91-115.

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
Baby’s father living in the household No Effect Teen mothers sample 2 year 195 mothers 40.2% 42% -1.8 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.05 Secondary
Baby’s father living in the household No Effect Teen mothers sample 1 year 236 mothers 47.4% 50% -2.6 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.06 Secondary
Married Unfavorable Teen mothers sample 2 year 195 mothers 19.2% 28.7% -9.5 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
HomVEE = -0.32 Secondary
Married No Effect Teen mothers sample 1 year 236 mothers 19.8% 15% 4.8 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.20 Secondary
Receiving AFDC at assessment No Effect Teen mothers sample 1 year 234 mothers 50.4% 58% -7.6 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.19 Secondary
Receiving AFDC at assessment No Effect Teen mothers sample 2 year 192 mothers 61.3% 54.6% 6.7 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.17 Secondary
Teen mother was only adult in the household No Effect Teen mothers sample 2 year 195 mothers 18.5% 26% -7.5 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.26 Secondary
Teen mother was only adult in the household No Effect Teen mothers sample 1 year 236 mothers 16.4% 15% 1.4 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = 0.06 Secondary
Working or in job training No Effect Teen mothers sample 1 year 234 mothers 16.5% 18.5% -2.0 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
HomVEE = -0.08 Secondary
Working or in job training No Effect Teen mothers sample 2 year 194 mothers 26.6% 29% -2.4 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
Baby’s father living in the household Percentage of fathers who lived in the same household as the study’s focal child Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Married Percentage of mothers who were married Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Receiving AFDC at assessment Percentage of households that received AFDC Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Teen mother was only adult in the household Percentage of households in which the mother was the only adult Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Working or in job training Percentage of mothers who were working or in job training Parent/caregiver report Not applicable Secondary
Top