Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO) Meets HHS Criteria

Last updated: July 2016

Model Overview

Theoretical Model

The Early Head Start-Home-Based Option is a comprehensive, two-generation federal initiative aimed at enhancing the development of infants and toddlers while strengthening families. The model is founded on nine principles:

  1. High-quality services;
  2. Activities that promote healthy development and identify atypical development at the earliest stage possible;
  3. Positive relationships and continuity, with an emphasis on the role of the parent as the child’s first, and most important, relationship;
  4. Activities that offer parents a meaningful and strategic role in the program’s vision, services, and governance;
  5. Inclusion strategies that respect the unique developmental trajectories of young children in the context of a typical setting, including children with disabilities;
  6. Cultural competence that acknowledges the profound role that culture plays in early development;
  7. Comprehensiveness, flexibility, and responsiveness of services that allow children and families to move across various program options over time as their life situation demands;
  8. Transition planning; and
  9. Collaboration with community partnerships that allow programs to expand their services.
View Revisions

Model Components

The Early Head Start model includes home- or center-based services, a combination of home- and center-based programs, and family child care services (services provided in family child care homes). The focus of this report is on the home-based service option. Early Head Start-Home-Based Option services include (1) weekly 90-minute home visits, and (2) two group socialization activities per month for parents and their children.

View Revisions

Target Population

The Early Head Start-Home-Based Option targets low-income pregnant women and families with children from birth to age 3 years. To be eligible for the Early Head Start-Home-Based Option, most families must be at or below the federal poverty level. Early Head Start-Home-Based Option programs must make at least 10 percent of their enrollment opportunities available to children with disabilities who are eligible for Part C services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in their state. Each individual Early Head Start-Home-Based Option program is allowed to develop specific program eligibility criteria, aligned with the model’s performance standards.

View Revisions

Where to Find Out More

Administration for Children and Families
Office of Head Start (OHS)
Mary E. Switzer Building
330 C Street, SW, 4th Floor
Washington, DC 20201
Website: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ohs/ , http://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/hslc

View Revisions

Effects Shown in Research & Outcome Measure Details

Summary of Findings

Please read Describing Effects for more information on these categories. Only results from studies that meet the standards for the high or moderate ratings are included above.

View Revisions

Reductions in Child Maltreatment

Outcomes Rated High

Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
Number of emergency room visits for injuries
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers Adjusted mean = 0.30 Adjusted mean = 0.30 Mean difference = 0.00 HomeVEE calculated = 0.00 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

ER visits due to accident or injury

Percentage of children who had visited an ER because of accident or injury Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary
View Revisions

Positive Parenting Practices

Outcomes Rated High

Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type Notes
HOME Language and Literacy
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = 0.16 Statistically significant, p < 0.05 Primary
Children's books (26 or more)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = 0.14 Statistically significant, p < 0.05 Secondary
Parent supportiveness during play
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = 0.04 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Secondary
Percent reading daily
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = 0.15 Statistically significant, p < 0.05 Secondary
Percent spanked last week
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = -0.06 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Secondary

footnote238

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

Negative value favors the intervention.

Teaching activities
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = 0.15 Statistically significant, p < 0.05 Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

HOME Language and Literacy

The Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment (HOME) scale is a 45-item measure that assesses parenting practices and the child's home environment, including physical structure, play materials, and amount of stimulation. Parent/caregiver interview and observational assessment

Not reported by author

Primary

Children's books (26 or more)

Percentage of parents who provided 26 or more children’s books in the home. Parent survey

Not reported by author

Secondary

Parent supportiveness during play

Parent behavior during play was coded. Parent behaviors reported include parental support (a composite of sensitivity, positive regard, and cognitive stimulation) and parent negative regard. Videotaped observation

Intercoder agreement= 94%

Secondary

Percent reading daily

Percentage of parents who read to their child daily. Parent survey

Not reported by author

Secondary

Percent spanked last week

Percentage of parents who spanked their child in the prior week.

Parent survey

Not reported by author

Secondary

Teaching activities

Percentage of parents who engaged in eight or more teaching activities with their child. Parent survey

Not reported by author

Secondary
Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type Notes
Physical punishment (24 months)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
24 months one site from larger EHS evaluation Not reported Not reported coeff = 0.04 Not available Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Secondary

footnote150

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

High score equals unfavorable.

Physical punishment (36 months)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
36 months one site from larger EHS evaluation Not reported Not reported coeff = -0.22 Not available Statistically significant, p < 0.05 Secondary

footnote151

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

Higher score equals unfavorable; Note that this outcome measures the incremental impact between 24 months and 36 months

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

Physical punishment

Whether or not the child had been “spanked” in the last week, and if so, how many times

Parent/caregiver report

Not reported by author

Secondary
Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
HOME absence of punitive interactions
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children Adjusted mean = 4.30 Adjusted mean = 4.30 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
HOME emotional responsivity
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children Adjusted mean = 6.50 Adjusted mean = 6.40 Mean difference = 0.10 Study reported = 0.10 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
HOME maternal verbal/social skills
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children Adjusted mean = 2.90 Adjusted mean = 2.90 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
HOME support of cognitive, language, and literacy environment
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children Adjusted mean = 10.30 Adjusted mean = 10.10 Mean difference = 0.20 Study reported = 0.10 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
HOME total score
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children Adjusted mean = 26.90 Adjusted mean = 26.40 Mean difference = 0.50 Study reported = 0.13 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Primary
KIDI
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children Adjusted mean = 3.40 Adjusted mean = 3.30 Mean difference = 0.10 Study reported = 0.17 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Secondary
Covers electric outlets (percentage)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 61.00 % = 57.20 = -3.80 Study reported = 0.08 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Has gates or doors in front of stairs (percentage)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 72.70 % = 75.50 = -2.80 Study reported = -0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Has poison control number (percentage)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 36.50 % = 36.40 = 0.10 Study reported = 0.00 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Has syrup of Ipecac at home (percentage)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 30.20 % = 30.60 = -0.40 Study reported = -0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Home has working smoke alarm (percentage)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 83.20 % = 83.30 = -0.01 Study reported = 0.00 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Index of discipline severity
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children Adjusted mean = 2.50 Adjusted mean = 2.60 Mean difference = -0.10 Study reported = -0.06 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Observed child play area is safe (percentage)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 74.60 % = 74.20 = 0.04 Study reported = 0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Parent-child activities to stimulate cognitive and language development
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children Adjusted mean = 4.50 Adjusted mean = 4.50 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Percentage of parents and children that have regular bedtime routines
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 69.20 % = 65.10 = 4.10 Study reported = 0.09 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Percentage of parents suggesting only mild responses to the hypothetical conflicts
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 48.00 % = 45.10 = 2.90 Study reported = 0.06 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Percentage of parents that read to child as part of bedtime routine
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 26.00 % = 19.50 = 6.50 Study reported = 0.16 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Secondary
Percentage of parents that read to child daily
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 55.50 % = 54.40 = 1.10 Study reported = 0.02 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Percentage of parents that set a regular bedtime for child
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 58.70 % = 54.00 = 4.70 Study reported = 0.09 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Percentage of parents that suggest responses to hypothetical conflict with child: Physical punishment
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 23.00 % = 26.10 = -3.10 Study reported = -0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Percentage of parents that suggest responses to hypothetical conflict with child: Prevent or distract
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 69.60 % = 66.60 = 3.00 Study reported = 0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Percentage of parents that suggest responses to hypothetical conflict with child: Remove child or object
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 78.60 % = 80.40 = -1.80 Study reported = -0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Percentage of parents that suggest responses to hypothetical conflict with child: Shout
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 6.00 % = 3.60 = 2.40 Study reported = 0.11 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Percentage of parents that suggest responses to hypothetical conflict with child: Talk and explain
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 34.10 % = 28.10 = 6.00 Study reported = 0.13 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Percentage of parents that suggest responses to hypothetical conflict with child: Threaten or command
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 28.80 % = 28.20 = 0.50 Study reported = 0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Reading frequency
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children Adjusted mean = 4.60 Adjusted mean = 4.60 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Spanked child in last week (percentage)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 49.00 % = 52.40 = -3.40 Study reported = -0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Uses a car seat (percentage)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 81.10 % = 80.70 = 0.04 Study reported = 0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Uses guards or gates for windows (percentage)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children % = 52.60 % = 55.40 = -2.80 Study reported = -0.06 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

KIDI

The KIDI measures the parent’s knowledge of childrearing practices and developmental processes. The researchers selected a subset of 8 items from the 17 items used in the Infant Health and Development Program evaluation. Items were coded on a 4-point scale indicating the average level of accuracy of responses to each statement. Parent/caregiver report

Cronbach’s α = .56

Secondary

HOME:

  • Emotional responsivity
  • Total score
  • Support of cognitive, language, and literacy environment
  • Maternal verbal/social skills
  • Absence of punitive interactions
The HOME assesses parenting practices and aspects of the home environment. Emotional responsivity measures the parent’s verbal responsivity to child, praise of child, and expressions of warmth and affection to child (sum of 7 observation items). Support of cognitive, language, and literacy environment measures the presence of toys, books, and developmentally appropriate furnishings and equipment. It also includes parental cognitive stimulation such as reading and talking to the child (sum of 12 items). Maternal verbal-social skills measures the parent’s ability to speak freely and clearly to the interviewer, with a maximum potential score of 3. Absence of punitive interactions measured harsh or punitive parenting behavior observed during the HOME interview. Items were scored 1 if the parent did not engage in the particular harsh or punitive behavior. Parent/caregiver interview and observational assessment

Cronbach’s α = 0.74 (Emotional responsivity) Cronbach’s α = 0.76 (Total score)  Cronbach’s α = 0.68 (Support of cognitive, language, and literacy environment) Cronbach’s α = 0.71 (Maternal verbal/social skills) Cronbach’s α = 0.78 (absence of punitive interactions)

Primary

Covers electric outlets

Percentage of families who used covers for the electrical outlets that the child could reach in the home Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Has gates or doors in front of stairs

Percentage of families who used guards or gates in front of their staircases Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Has poison control number

Percentage of parents who had access to the poison control number in case of poison emergencies Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Has syrup of Ipecac at home

Percentage of parents who kept syrup of Ipecac in the home in case of poison emergencies Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Home has working smoke alarm

Percentage of families who had working smoke alarms in the home Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Observed child play area is safe

Percentage of families who had a safe child play area Interviewer observation

Not applicable

Primary

Parent-child activities to stimulate cognitive and language development

The frequency with which the parent engaged in several activities with the child that can stimulate cognitive and language development, including reading or telling stories, dancing, singing, and playing outside together Parent/caregiver report

Not reported by author

Primary

Percentage of parents and children who have regular bedtime routines

Percentage of parents who had regular routines with the child around bedtime, such as singing lullabies, putting toys away, or telling stories Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Percentage of parents who read to child as part of bedtime routine

Percentage of parents who read to child as part of the regular bedtime routine and followed this routine four out of five weekdays in previous week Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Percentage of parents who read to child daily

Percentage of parents who read to the child every day or more than once per day Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Percentage of parents who set a regular bedtime for child

Percentage of parents who set a regular bedtime for the child, and the child was put to bed at that time four out of five weekdays in previous week Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Percentage of parents who suggest responses to hypothetical conflict with child:

  • Prevent or distract
  • Remove child or object
  • Talk and explain
  • Threaten or command
  • Shout
  • Physical punishment

Percentage of parents suggesting only mild responses to the hypothetical conflicts Index of discipline severity

Parents were asked how they would respond to three situations: (1) child keeps playing with breakables; (2) child refuses to eat; and (3) child has a temper tantrum in a store. Responses were coded dichotomously with 1 if the reference technique is ever mentioned and 0 if not. The percentage of mild responses was a binary variable indicating parents who mentioned only the following types of responses for each situation: prevent the situation; distract the child; talk to the child or explain the issue; ignore the behavior; or remove the child or object. The index of severity measured the degree of harshness of discipline strategies suggested. An individual’s score on this index ranged from 1 to 5, and was determined by the harshest strategy that was suggested in response to any of the three conflict situations. Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable Not reported by author (for Index of discipline severity)

Secondary

Reading frequency

A measure of the frequency with which parents read to their child Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Spanked child in last week

Percentage of parents who had spanked the child in the previous week Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Uses a car seat

Percentage of families who used a car seat for the child, and it was in the back seat of the car. Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Uses guards or gates for windows

Percentage of families who used guards or gates for their windows Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Outcomes Rated Moderate

Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
HOME harshness
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 950 children Adjusted mean = 0.30 Adjusted mean = 0.30 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.06 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
HOME internal physical environment
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 950 children Adjusted mean = 8.00 Adjusted mean = 8.00 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
HOME total score
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 950 children Adjusted mean = 28.30 Adjusted mean = 28.10 Mean difference = 0.20 Study reported = 0.04 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
HOME warmth
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 950 children Adjusted mean = 2.70 Adjusted mean = 2.70 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
HOME: support of language and learning
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 950 children Adjusted mean = 10.90 Adjusted mean = 10.70 Mean difference = 0.20 Study reported = 0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Detachment during parent-child puzzle challenge tasks
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 744 children Adjusted mean = 1.60 Adjusted mean = 1.60 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.04 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Detachment during parent-child semi-structured play
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 744 children Adjusted mean = 1.20 Adjusted mean = 1.30 Mean difference = -0.10 Study reported = -0.09 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Index of severity of discipline strategies
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 950 children Adjusted mean = 3.30 Adjusted mean = 3.30 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Intrusiveness during parent-child puzzle challenge task
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 744 children Adjusted mean = 2.50 Adjusted mean = 2.60 Mean difference = -0.10 Study reported = -0.09 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Intrusiveness during parent-child semistructured play
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 744 children Adjusted mean = 1.60 Adjusted mean = 1.60 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.06 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Negative regard during parent-child semistructured play
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 744 children Adjusted mean = 1.20 Adjusted mean = 1.30 Mean difference = -0.10 Study reported = -0.10 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Parent-child play
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 744 children Adjusted mean = 4.40 Adjusted mean = 4.40 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.06 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Percentage of children that follow a bedtime routine
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 950 children % = 72.00 % = 71.00 = 1.00 Study reported = 0.02 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Percentage of children with a regular bedtime
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 950 children % = 59.30 % = 55.60 = 3.70 Study reported = 0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Percentage of parents suggesting physical punishment as a discipline strategy
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 950 children = 44.90 = 44.50 = 0.40 Study reported = 0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Percentage of parents that read to child at bedtime
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 950 children % = 29.60 % = 25.80 = 3.80 Study reported = 0.08 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Percentage of parents that read to child daily
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 950 children % = 54.50 % = 55.70 = -1.20 Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Percentage of parents that spanked child in the past week
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 950 children % = 44.10 % = 49.60 = -5.50 Study reported = -0.11 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Percentage of parents that usually use a car seat correctly
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 950 children = 70.40 = 69.40 = 1.00 Study reported = 0.02 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Percentage of parents that would use mild discipline only
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 950 children = 45.80 = 45.90 = -0.10 Study reported = 0.00 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Quality of assistance during parent-child puzzle challenge task
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 744 children Adjusted mean = 3.60 Adjusted mean = 3.50 Mean difference = 0.10 Study reported = 0.03 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Supportive presence during parent-child puzzle challenge task
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 744 children Adjusted mean = 4.60 Adjusted mean = 4.50 Mean difference = 0.10 Study reported = 0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Supportiveness during parent-child semistructured play
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact study 744 children Adjusted mean = 4.00 Adjusted mean = 3.90 Mean difference = 0.10 Study reported = 0.16 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Primary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

HOME:

  • Total score
  • Internal physical environment
  • Warmth
  • Harshness
  • Support of language and learning
The HOME assesses parenting practices and aspects of the home environment. In addition to a total score, four subscales were used. Warmth measured responsive and supportive parenting behavior. Items included whether the mother kissed or caressed the child during the visit, whether her voice conveyed positive feeling, and whether she praised the child. Scores ranged from 0, if none of the positive behaviors were observed, to 3, if all of the behaviors were observed. Harshness measured harsh or punitive parenting behavior observed during the HOME interview. Items included whether the parent scolded the child, physically restrained the child, or slapped or spanked the child. For this subscale (but not for the total HOME score), items were reverse-coded so that higher scores indicate greater harshness. Scores ranged from 0, if no harsh behavior was observed, to 3, if the three types of harsh behavior were observed. Support of language and learning measured the breadth and quality of the mother’s speech and verbal responses to the child, such as whether the parent encourages the child to learn shapes, colors, numbers, and the alphabet; the presence of books, toys, and games accessible to the child; and whether the parent read to the child several times per week. Internal physical environment measured the cleanliness, organization, and warmth of the home environment. Items in this subscale were each coded on a 3-point scale for this subscale (but on a binary scale for the total HOME) ranging from 3 to 9. Parent/caregiver interview and observational assessment

Cronbach’s α = .80 (Total Score) Cronbach’s α = .77 ( Internal physical environment) Cronbach’s α = .72 (Warmth) Cronbach’s α = .55 (Harshness) Cronbach’s α = .67 (Support of language and learning) 

Primary

Parent-child play

Measured the frequency with which the parent engaged in several activities with the child that can stimulate cognitive and language development, including reading or telling stories, dancing, singing, and playing outside together Parent/caregiver report

Cronbach’s α = .80

Primary

Percentage of children who follow a bedtime routine

Percentage of parents who had regular routines with the child around bedtime, such as singing lullabies, putting toys away, or telling stories Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Percentage of children with a regular bedtime

Percentage of parents who set a regular bedtime for the child, and the child was put to bed at that time four out of five weekdays in previous week Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Percentage of parents suggesting physical punishment as a discipline strategy Percentage of parents who would use mild discipline only Index of severity of discipline strategies

Parents were asked about strategies for handling four different potential conflict situations with the child: (1) the child keeps playing with breakable things; (2) the child refuses to eat; (3) the child throws a temper tantrum in a public place; and (4) the child hits the parent in anger. Parents provided open-ended answers to how they would respond to each of the four situations, and these responses were classified into discipline strategies that were coded as binary variables. Index of severity measured the degree of harshness of discipline strategies suggested. An individual’s score on this ranged from 1 to 5, and was determined by the harshest strategy that was suggested in response to any of the four conflict situations. Mild Discipline was a binary variable indicating parents who mentioned only the following types of responses for each situation: prevent the situation; distract the child; remove the child or object; talk to the child or explain the issue; ignore the behavior; put the child in time out; send the child to his or her room; threaten to take away treats or threaten time out; or tell child "No." Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Percentage of parents who read to child at bedtime

Percentage of parents who read to child as part of the regular bedtime routine and followed this routine four out of five weekdays in previous week Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Percentage of parents who read to child daily

Percentage of parents who read to the child every day or more than once per day Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Percentage of parents who spanked child in the past week

Percentage of parents who had spanked the child in the previous week Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Percentage of parents who usually use a car seat correctly

Percentage of families who used a car seat for the child, and it was in the back seat of the car Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Supportive presence during parent-child puzzle challenge task Quality of assistance during parent-child puzzle challenge task Detachment during parent-child puzzle challenge tasks Intrusiveness during parent-child puzzle challenge task

The child was given a puzzle to play with, and the parent was instructed to give the child any help needed. After 3 minutes, or earlier if the puzzle was completed, the interviewer gave the child a second, harder puzzle and asked the mother not to help the child. If that puzzle was completed or 3 minutes elapsed, another, more challenging puzzle was provided. Child and parent behaviors were coded on a 7-point scale. Supportive presence measured the parent’s level of emotional support and enthusiasm toward the child and his or her work on the puzzles, displays of affection, and a positive attitude toward the child and his or her abilities. Quality of Assistance measured the frequency and quality of clear guidance to the child, flexible strategies for providing assistance, and diverse, descriptive verbal instructions and exchanges with the child. Detachment measured the extent to which the parent acted inattentive or indifferent toward the child. Intrusiveness measured the extent to which the parent controlled the child, rather than validating the child’s perspective and exploration. Higher scores indicate that the parent controlled the play agenda. Videotaped observation

Cronbach’s α = .82

Primary

Supportiveness during parent-child semistructured play  Intrusiveness during parent-child semistructured play  Negative regard during parent-child semistructured play Detachment during parent-child semistructured play

The parent and child were given three bags of toys and asked to play with the toys in sequence, and child and parent behaviors were coded. The assessment was adapted from the Three Box coding scales used in the NICHD Study of Early Child Care. Aspects of the parent’s behavior with the child were rated on a 7-point scale. Supportiveness was a measure of parental sensitivity, cognitive stimulation, and positive regard during play. Detachment measured the extent to which the parent was inattentive to the child, or interacted in a indifferent manner. Intrusiveness measured the degree to which the parent controlled the child, rather than recognizing and respecting the validity of the child’s independent efforts to solve the puzzle. Negative regard measured the parent’s expression of discontent with, anger toward, disapproval of, or rejection of the child. High scores on negative regard indicate that the parent used a disapproving or negative tone; showed frustration, anger, physical roughness, or harshness toward the child; threatened the child for failing at a task or not playing the way the parent desired; or belittled the child. Videotaped observation

Not reported by author

Primary
Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
Parent-child structured play: Negative regard
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 794 children Adjusted mean = 1.40 Adjusted mean = 1.50 Mean difference = -0.10 Study reported = -0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Parent-child structured play: Parent detachment
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 794 children Adjusted mean = 1.40 Adjusted mean = 1.50 Mean difference = -0.10 Study reported = -0.15 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Parent-child structured play: Parent intrusiveness
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 794 children Adjusted mean = 1.80 Adjusted mean = 1.90 Mean difference = -0.10 Study reported = -0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Parent-child structured play: Parent supportiveness
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 794 children Adjusted mean = 4.00 Adjusted mean = 3.90 Mean difference = 0.10 Study reported = 0.14 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

Parent-child structured play:

  • Parent supportiveness
  • Parent detachment
  • Parent intrusiveness
  • Negative regard
Parent behavior during a structured play task was coded. Parent supportiveness was measured as contingent responsivity, positive regard, and cognitive stimulation. Parent detachment was measured as under-involvement, lack of awareness, attention, or engagement. Parent intrusiveness was measured as over-involvement or over-control. Parent negative regard was measured as discontent, anger, or rejection. Videotaped observation

Not reported by author

Primary
View Revisions

Family Economic Self-Sufficiency

Outcomes Rated High

Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
Parent employed
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = 0.00 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Secondary
Parent income (dollars)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = 0.16 Statistically significant, p < 0.05 Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

Parent employed

Parents responded to the question "How much time in the past 6 months have you held a job or jobs in which you worked at least 20 hr per week?" (Answers were on a 5-point scale from 1-never to 5= all of the time.) Parent survey

Not reported by author

Secondary

Parent income (dollars)

Parents provided monthly income. Parent survey

Not reported by author

Secondary
Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
Average hours per week employed
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers Adjusted mean = 14.80 Adjusted mean = 15.10 Mean difference = -0.30 Study reported = 0.02 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Average hours per week in any employment, education, or training activity
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers Adjusted mean = 19.90 Adjusted mean = 18.50 Mean difference = 1.40 Study reported = -0.09 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Average hours per week in education or training
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers Adjusted mean = 4.50 Adjusted mean = 3.00 Mean difference = 1.50 Study reported = -0.24 Statistically significant,
p < 0.01
Secondary
Employed: 1st quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 33.80 % = 36.10 = -2.30 Study reported = 0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employed: 2nd quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 38.20 % = 42.90 = -4.70 Study reported = 0.10 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employed: 3rd quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 46.90 % = 50.10 = -3.20 Study reported = 0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employed: 4th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 51.90 % = 51.70 = 0.20 Study reported = 0.00 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employed: 5th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 57.70 % = 58.90 = -1.20 Study reported = 0.02 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employed: 6th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 61.70 % = 58.20 = 3.50 Study reported = -0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employed: 7th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 57.50 % = 55.00 = 2.50 Study reported = -0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employed: 8th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 55.90 % = 59.90 = -4.00 Study reported = 0.08 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employment, education, or training: 1st quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 47.30 % = 48.40 = -1.10 Study reported = 0.02 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employment, education, or training: 2nd quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 53.40 % = 55.50 = -2.10 Study reported = 0.04 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employment, education, or training: 3rd quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 62.30 % = 62.90 = -0.60 Study reported = 0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employment, education, or training: 4th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 65.20 % = 61.60 = 3.60 Study reported = -0.08 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employment, education, or training: 5th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 69.60 % = 67.90 = 1.70 Study reported = -0.04 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employment, education, or training: 6th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 72.90 % = 66.40 = 6.50 Study reported = -0.14 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Secondary
Employment, education, or training: 7th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 66.40 % = 62.70 = 3.70 Study reported = -0.08 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employment, education, or training: 8th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 65.20 % = 66.60 = -14.00 Study reported = 0.03 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Ever employed
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 83.10 % = 81.80 = 1.30 Study reported = -0.04 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Ever employed or in education/training
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 90.50 % = 88.90 = 1.60 Study reported = -0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Ever in education or training
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 53.10 % = 45.50 = 7.60 Study reported = -0.15 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Secondary
Ever received AFDC or TANF
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 55.20 % = 52.50 = 2.70 Study reported = -0.06 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Ever received food stamps
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers = 66.70 = 65.40 = 1.30 Study reported = -0.03 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Ever received welfare
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers = 72.90 = 70.50 = 2.40 Study reported = -0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Have GED
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 8.50 % = 11.50 = 3.00 Study reported = 0.09 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Have high school diploma
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 49.10 % = 45.70 = 3.40 Study reported = -0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
In education or training: 1st quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 21.20 % = 21.60 = -0.40 Study reported = 0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
In education or training: 2nd quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 25.10 % = 22.90 = 2.20 Study reported = -0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
In education or training: 3rd quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 28.20 % = 26.50 = 1.70 Study reported = -0.04 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
In education or training: 4th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 27.10 % = 22.50 = 4.60 Study reported = -0.11 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
In education or training: 5th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 28.60 % = 22.90 = 5.70 Study reported = -0.13 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Secondary
In education or training: 6th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 28.70 % = 21.30 = 7.40 Study reported = -0.18 Statistically significant,
p < 0.01
Secondary
In education or training: 7th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 23.10 % = 17.60 = 5.50 Study reported = -0.14 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Secondary
In education or training: 8th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 24.30 % = 15.60 = 8.70 Study reported = -0.22 Statistically significant,
p < 0.01
Secondary
Income above poverty line, (percentage)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers Adjusted mean % = 41.10 Adjusted mean % = 40.80 Mean difference = 0.30 Study reported = -0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Received AFDC or TANF: 1st quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 42.20 % = 29.40 = 12.80 Study reported = -0.06 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Received AFDC or TANF: 2nd quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 41.90 % = 42.40 = -0.50 Study reported = 0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Received AFDC or TANF: 3rd quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 46.20 % = 43.90 = 2.30 Study reported = -0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Received AFDC or TANF: 4th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 37.20 % = 38.10 = -0.90 Study reported = 0.02 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Received AFDC or TANF: 5th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 36.00 % = 37.80 = -1.80 Study reported = 0.04 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Received AFDC or TANF: 6th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 36.40 % = 38.50 = -2.10 Study reported = 0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Received AFDC or TANF: 7th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 27.40 % = 32.10 = -4.70 Study reported = 0.11 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Received AFDC or TANF: 8th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 27.80 % = 27.80 = 0.00 Study reported = 0.00 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Total AFDC or TANF benefits ($)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers = 2675.50 = 2833.80 = -158.30 Study reported = 0.04 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Total food stamps benefits ($)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers Adjusted mean = 2297.80 Adjusted mean = 2152.50 Mean difference = 145.30 Study reported = -0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Total welfare benefits ($)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers Adjusted mean = 5928.60 Adjusted mean = 6088.80 Mean difference = -160.20 Study reported = 0.02 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

Average hours per week employed

The average hours per week that program participants spent in paid work Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Average hours per week in any employment, education, or training activity

The average hours per week that program participants spent in school, job/vocational training, or employment activities Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Average hours per week in education or training

The average hours per week that program participants spend in school or job/vocational training Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Employed

Percentage of parents who were employed at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th quarters after enrolling in EHS Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Employment, education, or training

Percentage of parents who participated in school, job/vocational training, or employment activities at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th quarters after enrolling in EHS Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Ever employed

Percentage of parents who had ever been employed during their time in EHS Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Ever employed or in education/training

Percentage of parents who had ever participated in an education or job training program or been employed during their time in the program Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Ever in education or training

Percentage of parents who had ever participated in an education or job training program during their time in EHS Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Ever received AFDC or TANF

Percentage of households that had ever received AFDC or TANF during their time in EHS Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Ever received food stamps

Percentage of households that had ever received food stamps during their time in EHS Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Ever received welfare

Percentage of households that had ever received welfare benefits during their time in the program, including (1) AFDC or TANF, (2) SSI, (3) food stamps, and (4) GA Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Has GED

Percentage of parents who had earned a GED Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Has high school diploma

Percentage of parents who had earned a high school diploma Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

In education or training

Percentage of parents who were participating in an education or job training program at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th quarters after enrolling in EHS Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Income above poverty line

Percentage of households that had a household income above the poverty line Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Received AFDC or TANF

Percentage of households that had ever received AFDC or TANF at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th quarters after enrolling in EHS Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Total AFDC or TANF benefits

A sum of reported household AFDC or TANF benefits Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Total food stamp benefits

A sum of reported household food stamp benefits Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Total welfare benefits

A sum of all reported household welfare benefits, including (1) AFDC or TANF, (2) SSI, (3) food stamps, and (4) GA Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Outcomes Rated Moderate

Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
Ever in ESL class
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 3.40 % = 2.40 = 1.00 Study reported = -0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Ever in high school
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 12.60 % = 6.80 = 5.80 Study reported = -0.20 Statistically significant,
p < 0.01
Secondary
Ever in vocational program
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 18.20 % = 15.70 = 2.50 Study reported = -0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

Ever in ESL class

Percentage of parents who had ever enrolled in ESL classes during their time in EHS Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Ever in high school

Percentage of parents who had ever enrolled in high school during their time in EHS Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Ever in vocational program

Percentage of parents who had ever enrolled in a vocational training program during their time in EHS Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary
Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
Average hours per week employed
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers Adjusted mean = 12.70 Adjusted mean = 13.80 Mean difference = -1.10 Study reported = 0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Average hours per week in any employment, education, or training activity
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers Adjusted mean = 17.80 Adjusted mean = 17.70 Mean difference = 0.10 Study reported = -0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Average hours per week in education or training
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers Adjusted mean = 4.90 Adjusted mean = 3.70 Mean difference = 1.20 Study reported = -0.16 Statistically significant,
p < 0.01
Secondary
Employed: 1st quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 36.00 % = 39.20 = -3.20 Study reported = 0.06 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employed: 2nd quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 39.80 % = 46.40 = -6.60 Study reported = 0.13 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Secondary
Employed: 3rd quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 46.80 % = 51.00 = -4.20 Study reported = 0.08 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employed: 4th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 52.20 % = 53.00 = -0.80 Study reported = 0.02 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employed: 5th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 57.10 % = 60.80 = -3.70 Study reported = 0.08 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employment, education, or training: 1st quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 53.00 % = 52.90 = 0.10 Study reported = 0.00 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employment, education, or training: 2nd quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 57.90 % = 59.90 = -2.00 Study reported = 0.04 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employment, education, or training: 3rd quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 62.50 % = 59.90 = -1.50 Study reported = 0.03 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employment, education, or training: 4th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 65.30 % = 64.00 = 1.90 Study reported = -0.04 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Employment, education, or training: 5th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 69.30 % = 63.40 = -1.20 Study reported = 0.03 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Ever employed
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 66.90 % = 69.60 = -2.70 Study reported = 0.06 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Ever employed or in education/training
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 79.20 % = 80.20 = -1.00 Study reported = 0.03 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Ever in ESL class (percentage)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 2.30 % = 0.70 = 1.60 Study reported = -0.15 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Secondary
Ever in education or training (percentage)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 45.50 % = 39.60 = 6.30 Study reported = -0.12 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Secondary
Ever in high school (percentage)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 11.50 % = 6.20 = 5.30 Study reported = -0.18 Statistically significant,
p < 0.01
Secondary
Ever in vocational program (percentage)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 12.70 % = 8.50 = -6.80 Study reported = -0.15 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Secondary
Ever received AFDC or TANF
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 54.10 % = 52.60 Not reported = -1.50 Study reported = -0.03 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Ever received food stamps
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 66.00 % = 64.20 = 1.80 Study reported = -0.04 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Ever received welfare
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 75.30 % = 69.60 = 2.70 Study reported = -0.06 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Have GED
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 8.20 % = 9.00 = -0.80 Study reported = 0.03 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Have high school diploma
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 46.50 % = 45.90 = 0.60 Study reported = -0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
In education or training: 1st quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 24.50 % = 23.30 = 1.20 Study reported = -0.03 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
In education or training: 2nd quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 28.90 % = 24.60 = 4.30 Study reported = -0.10 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
In education or training: 3rd quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 29.50 % = 26.70 = 2.80 Study reported = -0.06 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
In education or training: 4th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 28.20 % = 22.60 = 5.60 Study reported = -0.13 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Secondary
In education or training: 5th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 30.50 % = 23.60 = 6.90 Study reported = -0.16 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Secondary
Income above poverty line, (percentage)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers Adjusted mean % = 30.50 Adjusted mean % = 29.70 Mean difference = 30.80 Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Received AFDC or TANF: 1st quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 43.20 % = 40.40 = 2.80 Study reported = -0.06 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Received AFDC or TANF: 2nd quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 42.60 % = 43.00 = -0.40 Study reported = 0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Received AFDC or TANF: 3rd quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 47.00 % = 44.50 = 2.50 Study reported = -0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Received AFDC or TANF: 4th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 39.20 % = 39.50 = -0.30 Study reported = -0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Received AFDC or TANF: 5th quarter
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 37.80 % = 38.80 = -1.00 Study reported = 0.02 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Total AFDC or TANF benefits ($)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers Adjusted mean = 1967.80 Adjusted mean = 1927.50 Mean difference = 49.30 Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Total food stamps benefits ($)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers Adjusted mean = 1435.80 Adjusted mean = 1400.90 Mean difference = 34.90 Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Total welfare benefits ($)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers Adjusted mean = 4141.40 Adjusted mean = 3911.70 Mean difference = 229.70 Study reported = -0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

Average hours per week employed

Parents were asked about jobs that they had held during the follow-up period, including the start and end dates for those jobs and the typical hours per week they worked in those jobs. From that information, the authors constructed a weekly timeline of employment activities and indicators of whether parents were employed during the first five quarters following random assignment. They also calculated the average hours per week parents spent in employment during the 15-month follow-up period. Averages include zero hours. Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary

Average hours per week in any employment, education, or training activity

The weekly histories of education/training activities and jobs were combined to create a timeline of participation in any of these self-sufficiency activities and indicators of whether parents participated in any self-sufficiency activities during each of the first five quarters following random assignment. The authors also added the average number of hours spent in education/training and jobs to get the average number of hours parents spent in any self-sufficiency activities during the first 15 months after random assignment. Averages include zero hours. Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary

Average hours per week in education or training

The average hours per week that program participants spent in school or job/vocational training Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Employed

Percentage of parents who were employed at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th quarters after enrolling in EHS Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Employment, education, or training

Percentage of parents who participated in school, job/vocational training, or employment activities at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th quarters after enrolling in EHS Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Ever employed

Percentage of parents who had ever been employed during their time in the program Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Ever employed or in education/training

Percentage of parents who had ever participated in an education or job training program or been employed during their time in the program Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Ever in ESL class

Percentage of parents who had ever enrolled in ESL classes during their time in EHS Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Ever in education or training

Percentage of parents who had ever participated in an education or job training program during their time in EHS Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Ever in high school

Percentage of parents who had ever enrolled in high school during their time in EHS Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Ever in vocational program

Percentage of parents who had ever enrolled in a vocational training program during their time in EHS Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Ever received AFDC or TANF

Parents were asked about their receipt of benefits, including the amount they received and the months during which they received it. From this information the authors created a monthly timeline of benefit receipt, as well as indicators of benefit receipt during each of the first five quarters after random assignment. They also added the benefit amounts to obtain the total amount received during the 15-month follow-up period. Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary

Ever received food stamps

Parents were asked about their receipt of benefits, including the amount they received and the months during which they received it. From this information the authors created a monthly timeline of benefit receipt, as well as indicators of benefit receipt during each of the first five quarters after random assignment. They also added the benefit amounts to obtain the total amount received during the 15-month follow-up period. Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary

Ever received other welfare

Percentage of households that had ever received welfare benefits during their time in the program, including (1) AFDC or TANF, (2) SSI, (3) food stamps, and (4) GA Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Ever received welfare

Parents were asked about their receipt of benefits, including the amount they received and the months during which they received it. From this information the authors created a monthly timeline of benefit receipt, as well as indicators of benefit receipt during each of the first five quarters after random assignment. They also added the benefit amounts to obtain the total amount received during the 15-month follow-up period. Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary

Has GED

Percentage of parents who had earned a GED Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Has high school diploma

Percentage of parents who had earned a high school diploma Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

In education or training

Percentage of parents who were participating in an education or job training program at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th quarters after enrolling in EHS Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Income above poverty line, (percentage)

Parents were asked about their family income during the last year. The authors compared information on their annual income and the number of children in their family with federal poverty levels to create an indicator of whether or not the family’s income during the year prior to the second follow-up was above the poverty level. Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary

Received AFDC or TANF

Percentage of households that had ever received AFDC or TANF at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th quarters after enrolling in EHS Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Total AFDC or TANF benefits

A sum of reported household AFDC or TANF benefits Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Total food stamp benefits

A sum of reported household food stamp benefits Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Total welfare benefits ($)

A sum of all reported household welfare benefits, including (1) AFDC or TANF, (2) SSI, (3) food stamps, and (4) GA Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary
View Revisions

Linkages and Referrals

Outcomes Rated High

Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
Any family health services
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 100.00 % = 100.00 = 0.00 Not Applicable Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Any family mental health services
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 23.90 % = 21.00 = 2.90 HomeVEE calculated = 0.10 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Identification of child’s disability
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 7.60 % = 5.00 = 2.70 HomeVEE calculated = -0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Services for child with disability
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 5.30 % = 3.70 Mean difference = 1.50 HomeVEE calculated = -0.06 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

Any family health services

Percentage of families that had received any family health services Parent interview

Not applicable

Secondary

Any family mental health services

Percentage of families that had received any family mental health services Parent interview

Not applicable

Secondary

Identification of child’s disability

Percentage of children identified as having a disability Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Services for child with disability

Percentage of families that received early intervention servicesfor a child with a disability Parent interview

Not applicable

Secondary

Outcomes Rated Moderate

Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
Any education-related services
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 86.90 % = 50.80 = 36.10 HomeVEE calculated = 1.13 Statistically significant,
p < 0.01
Secondary
Any employment-related services
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 77.30 % = 47.10 = 30.20 HomeVEE calculated = 0.81 Statistically significant,
p < 0.01
Secondary
Housing assistance
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 65.70 % = 64.10 = 1.60 HomeVEE calculated = 0.04 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Transportation assistance
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 32.00 % = 23.90 = 8.10 HomeVEE calculated = 0.24 Statistically significant,
p < 0.01
Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

Any education-related services

Indicates whether the family reported receiving any education-related services from the EHS program Parent interview

Not applicable

Secondary

Any employment-related services

Indicates whether the family reported receiving help finding a job from the EHS program Parent interview

Not applicable

Secondary

Housing assistance

Indicates whether the family reported receiving housing assistance from the EHS program Parent interview

Not applicable

Secondary

Transportation assistance

Indicates whether the family reported receiving trasnporation assistance from the EHS program Parent interview

Not applicable

Secondary
Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
Any education-related services
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 83.40 % = 45.20 = 38.20 Study reported = 1.09 Statistically significant, p < 0.01 Secondary
Any employment-related services
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 71.60 % = 32.60 = 39.00 Study reported = 1.00 Statistically significant, p < 0.01 Secondary
Any family health services
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 97.60 % = 98.20 = -0.60 Study reported = -0.18 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Any family mental health services
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 19.70 % = 18.40 = 1.30 Study reported = 0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Housing assistance
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 55.60 % = 54.20 = 1.40 Study reported = 0.03 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Identification of child’s disability
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 5.10 % = 2.50 = 2.60 Study reported = 0.45 Statistically significant, p < 0.05 Secondary
Services for child with disability
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 3.80 % = 1.70 = 2.10 Study reported = 0.50 Statistically significant, p < 0.05 Secondary
Transportation assistance
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 1059 mothers % = 29.80 % = 20.70 = 9.10 Study reported = 0.29 Statistically significant, p < 0.01 Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

Any education-related services

Indicates whether the family reported receiving any education-related services from the EHS program Parent interview

Not applicable

Secondary

Any employment-related services

Indicates whether the family reported receiving help finding a job from the EHS program Parent interview

Not applicable

Secondary

Any family health services

No description provided Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary

Any family mental health services

No description provided Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary

Housing assistance

Indicates whether the family reported receiving housing assistance from the EHS program Parent interview

Not applicable

Secondary

Identification of child’s disability

Indicates whether the family reported that a child’s disability was identified Parent interview

Not applicable

Secondary

Services for child with disability

Indicates whether the family reported receiving services for a child with a disability Parent interview

Not applicable

Secondary

Transportation assistance

Indicates whether the family reported receiving trasnporation assistance from the EHS program Parent interview

Not applicable

Secondary
View Revisions

Maternal Health

Outcomes Rated High

Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
Subsequent birth by 24 months after random assignment
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact sample 941 mothers % = 21.80 % = 24.70 Mean difference = -2.90 Study reported = -0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

Subsequent birth by 24 months after random assignment

Percentage of parents who had a subsequent birth by 24 months after random assignment Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary
Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
FES: Family conflict
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
24 months postpartum EHS-HBO impact sample 966 mothers Adjusted mean = 1.70 Adjusted mean = 1.70 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.12 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
PSI Parent-Child dysfunctional interaction
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
24 months postpartum EHS-HBO impact sample 966 mothers Adjusted mean = 17.10 Adjusted mean = 17.50 Mean difference = -0.40 Study reported = -0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
PSI parental distress
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
24 months postpartum EHS-HBO impact sample 966 mothers Adjusted mean = 25.10 Adjusted mean = 26.20 Mean difference = -1.10 Study reported = -0.11 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

FES: Family conflict

The FES assesses the social-environmental characteristics of families. The researchers used the Family Conflict dimension, which measures the extent to which anger, aggression, frustration, and contentious interactions are common in the family. Parent/caregiver report

Cronbach’s α = 0.67

Primary

PSI–SF: Parental DistressPSI: Parent-Child Dysfunctional Interaction

The PSI–SF assesses stress in the parent-child relationship arising from child temperament, parental depression, and negatively reinforcing parent-child interactions. The researchers used two subscales: (1) Parental Distress, which measures the level of distress parents feel in their role because of personal factors; and (2) Parent-Child Dysfunctional Interaction, which measures parents’ perception of parent-child interaction not meeting expectations and feelings of child rejection and abuse. Parent/caregiver report

Cronbach’s α = 0.82 (Parental Distress)Cronbach’s a = 0.78 (Parent Child Dysfunctional Interaction)

Primary

Outcomes Rated Moderate

Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type Notes
Parent depression
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = -0.08 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Secondary

footnote238

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

Negative value favors the intervention.

Someone in household had alcohol/drug problem in past year
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = -0.04 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Secondary

footnote238

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

Negative value favors the intervention.

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

Parent depression

The Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) measured depression. Parent survey

Internal consistency= 0.88

Secondary

Someone in household had alcohol/drug problem in past year

Parent survey response. Parent survey

Not reported by author

Secondary
Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
FES: Family conflict
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
36 months postpartum EHS-HBO impact sample 950 mothers Adjusted mean = 1.70 Adjusted mean = 1.70 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
PSI Parent-Child dysfunctional interaction
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
36 months postpartum EHS-HBO impact sample 950 mothers Adjusted mean = 17.50 Adjusted mean = 18.10 Mean difference = -0.60 Study reported = -0.10 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
PSI Parental distress
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
36 months postpartum EHS-HBO impact sample 950 mothers Adjusted mean = 24.90 Adjusted mean = 26.30 Mean difference = -1.40 Study reported = -0.14 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

FES: Family conflict

The FES assesses the social-environmental characteristics of families. The researchers used the Family Conflict dimension, which measures the extent to which anger, aggression, frustration, and contentious interactions are common in the family. Parent/caregiver report

Cronbach’s α = 0.68

Primary

PSI: Parental DistressPSI: Parent-Child Dysfunctional Interaction

The PSI–SF assesses stress in the parent-child relationship arising from child temperament, parental depression, and negatively reinforcing parent-child interactions. The researchers used two subscales: (1) Parental Distress, which measures the level of distress parents feel in their role because of personal factors; and (2) Parent-Child Dysfunctional Interaction, which measures parents’ perception of parent-child interaction not meeting expectations and feelings of child rejection and abuse. Parent/caregiver report

Cronbach’s α = 0.84 (Parental Distress) Cronbach’s a = 0.81 (Parent-Child Dysfunctional Interaction)

Primary
Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
CIDI short screening scales: Major depression (probability)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
24 months postpartum EHS-HBO impact sample 966 mothers Adjusted mean = 14.70 Adjusted mean = 12.00 Mean difference = 2.80 Study reported = 0.09 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Parent’s health status
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
24 months postpartum EHS-HBO impact sample 966 mothers Adjusted mean = 3.40 Adjusted mean = 3.40 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = 0.00 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

CIDI-SF: Major depression

The CIDI-SF assesses the presence of six Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and two DSM-IIIR substance disorders. The researchers used one section of the CIDI-SF, Major Depression, which provided the probability of a depressive episode having been experienced during the previous 12 months. Parent/caregiver report

Not reported by author

Primary

CIDI short screening scales: Major depression (probability)

Provides a probability for a DSM-IV major depressive episode in the past 12 months Parent assessment

Not reported by author

Primary

Parent’s health status

A measure of perceived health status on a scale of 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent) Parent/caregiver report

Not reported by author

Secondary
Early Head Start Infant Mental Health Home-Based Services Adaptation (IMH-HB EHS)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type Notes
PSI: parent-child dysfunctional interaction
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Pooled (ages 3 and 7) Full sample Not reported Not reported Not reported Not available Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Primary
PSI: parental distress
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Pooled (ages 3 and 7) Full sample Not reported Not reported Not reported Not available Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Primary
F-COPES: cognitive reframing
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Pooled (ages 3, 5, and 7) Full sample Not reported Not reported Not reported Not available Not statistically significant, p >0.10 Secondary
F-COPES: seeking support from family and friends
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Pooled (ages 3, 5, and 7) Full sample Not reported Not reported Not reported Not available Not statistically significant, p >0.10 Secondary
F-COPES: seeking support from neighbors
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Pooled (ages 3, 5, and 7) Full sample Not reported Not reported Not reported Not available Statistically significant, p<0.05 Secondary

footnote234

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

Comparison group was more likely to seek neighbor support. P-value reported by the author was based on an F-test of repeated measure analysis.

F-COPES: seeking support from service providers
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Pooled (ages 3, 5, and 7) Full sample Not reported Not reported Not reported Not available Not statistically significant, p >0.10 Secondary
F-COPES: spiritual coping
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Pooled (ages 3, 5, and 7) Full sample Not reported Not reported Not reported Not available Not statistically significant, p > 0.10 Secondary
McMaster FAD: healthy functioning
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Pooled (ages 3, 5, and 7) Full sample Not reported Not reported Not reported Not available Statistically significant, p<0.01 Secondary

footnote235

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

IMH-HB <abbr title="Early Head Start">EHS</abbr> group had higher scores on healthy functioning. P-value reported by the author was based on an F-test of repeated measure analysis.

McMaster FAD: unhealthy functioning
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Pooled (ages 3, 5, and 7) Full sample Not reported Not reported Not reported Not available Statistically significant, p<0.01 Secondary

footnote236

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

IMH-HB <abbr title="Early Head Start">EHS</abbr> group had lower scores on unhealthy functioning. P-value reported by the author was based on an F-test of repeated measure analysis.

Pearlin Mastery, age 7
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 7 0 Not reported Not reported Not reported Not available Statistically significant, p<0.05 Secondary

footnote237

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

IMH-HB <abbr title="Early Head Start">EHS</abbr> group showed higher levels of perceived mastery. P-value reported by the author was based on an F-test of repeated measure analysis.

PES: attitudes
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Pooled (ages 3, 5, and 7) Full sample Not reported Not reported Not reported Not available Statistically significant, p<0.01 Secondary

footnote232

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

IMH-HB <abbr title="Early Head Start">EHS</abbr> group had higher levels of empowerment based on reported attitudes. P-value reported by the author was based on an F-test of repeated measure analysis.

PES: skills & knowledge
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Pooled (ages 3, 5, and 7) Full sample Not reported Not reported Not reported Not available Statistically significant, p<0.01 Secondary

footnote233

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

IMH-HB <abbr title="Early Head Start">EHS</abbr> group had higher levels of empowerment based on reported knowledge and skills. P-value reported by the author was based on an F-test of repeated measure analysis.

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
View Revisions

Child Health

Outcomes Rated High

Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
Any child health services
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 100.00 % = 99.80 = 0.20 Not Applicable Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Any dentist visits
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 27.10 % = 28.10 = -1.00 HomeVEE calculated = -0.03 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Any doctor visits
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 99.00 % = 98.70 = 0.30 HomeVEE calculated = 0.16 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Any emergency room visits
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 53.40 % = 56.00 = -2.60 HomeVEE calculated = -0.06 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Any immunizations
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 99.10 % = 98.50 = 0.70 HomeVEE calculated = 0.31 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Any screening tests
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
28 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact study 941 mothers % = 62.40 % = 61.00 = 1.40 HomeVEE calculated = 0.04 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

Any child health services

No description provided Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary

Any dentist visits

No description provided Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary

Any doctor visits

No description provided Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary

Any emergency room visits

No description provided Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary

Any immunizations

No description provided Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary

Any screening tests

No description provided Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary

Outcomes Rated Moderate

Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
Child’s health status
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact sample 950 children Adjusted mean = 4.00 Adjusted mean = 4.00 Mean difference = 0.00 Study reported = -0.04 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Percentage of children in fair or poor health
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 3 EHS-HBO impact sample 950 children % = 9.80 % = 9.60 Mean difference = 0.20 Study reported = 0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

Child’s health status

The child health status was rated on a five-point scale of 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent). Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary

Percentage of children in fair or poor health

Percentage of children who were reported to be in fair or poor health Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Secondary
Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
Any child health services
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact sample 1059 mothers % = 99.10 % = 99.60 = -0.50 HomeVEE calculated = -0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Any dentist visits
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact sample 1059 mothers % = 10.70 % = 10.80 = -0.10 HomeVEE calculated = -0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Any doctor visits
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact sample 1059 mothers % = 93.60 % = 93.40 = 0.20 HomeVEE calculated = 0.02 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Any emergency room visits
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact sample 1059 mothers % = 41.30 % = 43.20 = -1.90 HomeVEE calculated = -0.05 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Any immunizations
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact sample 1059 mothers % = 96.30 % = 97.90 = -1.60 HomeVEE calculated = -0.35 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Any screening tests
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
7 to 16 months after assignment EHS-HBO impact sample 1059 mothers % = 52.40 % = 49.40 = 3.00 HomeVEE calculated = 0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

Any child health services

No description provided Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary

Any dentist visits

No description provided Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary

Any doctor visits

No description provided Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary

Any emergency room visits

No description provided Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary

Any immunizations

No description provided Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary

Any screening tests

No description provided Parent report

Not applicable

Secondary
View Revisions

Child Development and School Readiness

Outcomes Rated High

Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type Notes
CBCL Aggressive behavior
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = -0.09 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Primary

footnote238

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

Negative value favors the intervention.

FACES positive approaches to learning
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = 0.18 Statistically significant, p < 0.01 Secondary
FACES Social Behavior Problems
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = -0.13 Statistically significant, p < 0.05 Secondary

footnote238

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

Negative value favors the intervention.

Child has an individualized education plan
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = -0.02 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Secondary

footnote238

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

Negative value favors the intervention.

Engagement during play
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = 0.04 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Primary
English receptive vocabulary (PPVT)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = 0.05 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Primary
Leiter attention sustained
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = 0.09 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Primary
Negativity toward parent during play
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = -0.01 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Primary

footnote238

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

Negative value favors the intervention.

Observed attention
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = 0.07 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Primary
Observed Leiter emotion regulation
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = 0.02 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Primary
Speech problems
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = -0.10 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Secondary

footnote238

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

Negative value favors the intervention.

Woodcock Johnson Applied Problems
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = 0.08 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Primary
Woodcock Johnson Letter-Word identification (English)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 5 Home-based program approach Not reported Not reported Not reported Study reported = 0.03 Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Primary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

CBCL Aggressive behavior

The Child Behavior Checklist is a questionnaire that assesses behavioral problems in young children. Parent survey

Internal consistency= 0.89

Primary

FACES positive approaches to learning

Subscales from Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) assessed child social-emotional functioning, social skills, and positive approaches to learning. Parent survey

Internal consistency= 0.64

Secondary

FACES Social Behavior Problems

Subscales from Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) assessed child social-emotional functioning, social skills, and positive approaches to learning. Parent survey

Internal consistency= 0.76

Secondary

Child has an individualized education plan

Percent of parents who report that their child has an individualized education plan. Parent survey

Not reported by author

Secondary

Engagement during play

Assessment of parent-child semistructured play evaluated children’s engagement with parent and negativity toward parents. The free play tasks and coding scheme used were adapted from the National Institute of Child Health and Development (NICHD) Study of Early Child Care. Videotape observation

Intercoder reliability= 96%

Primary

English receptive vocabulary (PPVT)

The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT)-III assesses receptive vocabulary for Standard American English in young children. Child assessment

Internal consistency= 0.96

Primary

Leiter attention sustained

The Leiter-R Sustained Attention test assesses skills in memory or attention in children. Child assessment

Internal consistency= 0.75

Primary

Negativity toward parent during play

The child’s behavior during a play task was coded. Child engagement with parent was measured as the extent to which the child interacted with the parent and communicated positive feelings. Child negativity toward parent measured displays of anger, rejection, or a negative reaction to parent’s behavior. Child sustained attention with objects was measured as the duration of the child’s focus on an object or set of objects. Videotape observation

Intercoder reliability= 99%

Primary

Observed attention

The Leiter-R Sustained Attention test assesses skills in memory or attention in children. Child assessment

Internal consistency= 0.93

Primary

Observed Leiter emotion regulation

The Leiter-R Sustained Attention test assesses skills in memory or attention in children. Child assessment

Internal consistency= 0.93

Primary

Speech problems

Parent survey response. Parent survey

Not reported by author

Secondary

Woodcock Johnson Applied Problems

The Woodcock-Johnson-Revised Test (WJ-R) assesses scholastic ability and intelligence in children. The Applied Problems subscale measures symbolic representation, counting, and simple addition and subtraction. Child assessment

Internal consistency= 0.91

Primary

Woodcock Johnson Letter-Word identification (English)

The Woodcock-Johnson-Revised Test (WJ-R) assesses scholastic ability and intelligence in children. The Letter-Word Identification subscale measures recognition of letters and words. Child assessment

Internal consistency= 0.84

Primary
Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type Notes
Child aggression (24 months)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
24 months one site from larger EHS evaluation Not reported Not reported coeff = 0.06 Not available Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Primary

footnote152

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

Higher score equals unfavorable; Note that this outcome controls for physical punishment at 24 months

Child aggression (36 months)
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
36 months one site from larger EHS evaluation Not reported Not reported coeff = 0.07 Not available Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 Primary

footnote153

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

Higher score equals unfavorable; Note that this outcome measures the incremental impact between 24 months and 36 months and also controls for aggression at 24 months)

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

Child aggression

For a 19-item subscale on aggression from the Child Behavior Checklist, the number of times a behavior was never true, true, or often true of the child Parent/caregiver report

Cronbach's α = 0.85

Primary
Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
FACES aggression
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Kindergarten entry EHS-HBO impact study 928 children Adjusted mean = 2.60 Adjusted mean = 2.70 Mean difference = -0.10 Study reported = -0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Secondary
Show Study Outcome Measure Summary
Outcome Measure Outcome Measure Description Collection method Properties Outcome Type Operations links

FACES: Aggression

Subscales from FACES assessed child social-emotional functioning, social skills, and positive approaches to learning. Child assessment

Cronbach’s α = 0.64

Secondary
Early Head Start–Home-Based Option (EHS-HBO)
Show Study Effects Details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up Timing Sample Sample Size Program Group Comparison Group Group Difference Effect size Statistical significance Outcome Type
CBCL – Aggression
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect
Age 2 EHS-HBO impact study 966 children Adjusted mean = 10.40 Adjusted mean = 10.50 Mean difference = -0.10 Study reported = -0.01 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Primary
Average MacArthur CDI – Sentence Complexity
FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect