Healthy Families America (HFA)® Meets HHS Criteria

Last updated: 2020

Effects shown in research & outcome measure details

Child development and school readiness

Findings rated high

Healthy Families America (HFA)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance
BSID Cognitive score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Age 2 Children with complete medical record data, Alaska trial 249 children Adjusted mean = 88.00 Adjusted mean = 84.80 Mean difference = 3.20 Not available Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
BSID percentage within normal limits on cognitive
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Age 2 Children with complete medical record data, Alaska trial 249 children % (adjusted) = 58.00 Adjusted mean % = 48.00 OR = 1.55 HomeVEE calculated = 0.24 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
BSID percentage within normal limits on psychomotor
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Age 2 Children with complete medical record data, Alaska trial 249 children % (adjusted) = 85.00 Adjusted mean % = 80.00 OR = 1.36 HomeVEE calculated = 0.21 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
BSID Psychomotor score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Age 2 Children with complete medical record data, Alaska trial 249 children Adjusted mean = 98.10 Adjusted mean = 96.00 Mean difference = 2.10 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
CBCL percentage with externalizing scores in normal range
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Age 2 Children in custody of biological mother at year 2 follow-up interview, Alaska trial 249 children % (adjusted) = 82.00 Adjusted mean % = 77.00 OR = 1.48 HomeVEE calculated = 0.19 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
CBCL percentage with internalizing scores in normal range
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Age 2 Children in custody of biological mother at year 2 follow-up interview, Alaska trial 249 children % (adjusted) = 87.00 Adjusted mean % = 79.00 OR = 2.06 HomeVEE calculated = 0.35 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
CBCL total externalizing score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Age 2 Children in custody of biological mother at year 2 follow-up interview, Alaska trial 249 children Adjusted mean = 50.80 Adjusted mean = 53.00 Mean difference = -2.20 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
CBCL total internalizing score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Age 2 Children in custody of biological mother at year 2 follow-up interview, Alaska trial 249 children Adjusted mean = 48.20 Adjusted mean = 51.00 Mean difference = -2.80 Not available Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Show outcome measure summary
Outcome measure Outcome measure description Collection method Properties Operations links

BSID: MDI and PDI

The BSID tests the mental, motor, and behavioral development and abilities of young children. The researchers examined the MDI and PDI as continuous and binary for scores <85 versus those greater than or equal to 85. Child assessment

Not reported by author

CBCL: Internalizing and Externalizing

The CBCL is a questionnaire that assesses behavioral problems in young children. The internalizing and externalizing scales were measured as continuous and as a binary variable using recommended cut points for normal (<60) versus borderline (60–63) and clinical scores (>63). Parent/caregiver report

Not reported by author

Healthy Families America (HFA)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance
Aggressive behaviors (CBCL)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
7 year New York sample 897 mothers Adjusted mean = 6.99 Adjusted mean = 6.72 Mean difference = 0.27 Study reported = 0.04 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Anxious, depressed (CBCL)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
7 year New York sample 897 mothers Adjusted mean = 2.89 Adjusted mean = 2.97 Mean difference = -0.08 Study reported = -0.03 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Attention problems (CBCL)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
7 year New York sample 897 mothers Adjusted mean = 4.77 Adjusted mean = 4.75 Mean difference = 0.02 Study reported = 0.01 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Percentage participating in a gifted program
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
7 year New York sample 897 mothers Adjusted mean % = 5.38 Adjusted mean % = 1.99 OR = 2.80 Not available Statistically significant, p < 0.05
Percentage receiving remedial services
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
7 year New York sample 897 mothers Adjusted mean % = 32.83 Adjusted mean % = 33.31 OR = 0.98 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Percentage receiving special education
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
7 year New York sample 897 mothers Adjusted mean % = 12.33 Adjusted mean % = 16.74 OR = 0.70 Not available Statistically significant, p < 0.05
Percentage repeating a grade
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
7 year New York sample 897 mothers Adjusted mean % = 12.33 Adjusted mean % = 16.74 OR = 0.98 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Percentage skipping school more than once
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
7 year New York sample 897 mothers Adjusted mean % = 2.40 Adjusted mean % = 2.20 OR = 1.08 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Rule-breaking behavior (CBCL)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
7 year New York sample 897 mothers Adjusted mean = 2.74 Adjusted mean = 2.66 Mean difference = 0.08 Study reported = 0.03 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Social problems (CBCL)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
7 year New York sample 897 mothers Adjusted mean = 1.31 Adjusted mean = 1.15 Mean difference = 0.16 Study reported = -0.04 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Withdrawn, depressed (CBCL)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
7 year New York sample 897 mothers Adjusted mean = 1.47 Adjusted mean = 1.54 Mean difference = -0.07 Study reported = -0.04 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Show outcome measure summary
Outcome measure Outcome measure description Collection method Properties Operations links

Aggressive behaviors (CBCL)

The Achenbach Child Behavior Checklist assesses children’s emotional and behavioral problems. Researchers selected five subscales that aligned with constructs of interest: attention problems, rule breaking and aggressive behaviors, social problems, and the anxious-depressed and withdrawn-depressed syndrome scales. Parent/caregiver report

Not reported by author

Anxious, depressed (CBCL)

The Child BehaviorChecklist for Ages6ndash;8(CBCL/6-18) assesses children’s emotional and behavioral problems. Researchers selected five subscales that aligned with constructs of interest: attention problems, rule breaking and aggressive behaviors, social problems, and the anxious-depressed and withdrawn-depressed syndrome scales.

Parent/caregiver report

Not reported by author

Attention problems (CBCL)

The Achenbach Child Behavior Checklist assesses children’s emotional and behavioral problems. Researchers selected five subscales that aligned with constructs of interest: attention problems, rule breaking and aggressive behaviors, social problems, and the anxious-depressed and withdrawn-depressed syndrome scales. Parent/caregiver report

Not reported by author

Percentage participating in a gifted program

Percentage of children who were participating in a gifted or talented program at the time of the year 7 interview Parent/caregiver report

 Not applicable

Percentage receiving remedial services

Percentage of children who were receiving remedial education services for math and writing at the time of the year 7 interview Parent/caregiver report

 Not applicable

Percentage receiving special education

Percentage of children who were enrolled in special education services at the time of the year 7 interview Parent/caregiver report

 Not applicable

Percentage repeating a grade

Percentage of children who had repeated a grade at the time of the year 7 interview Parent/caregiver report

 Not applicable

Percentage skipping school more than once

Percentage of children who had skipped school more than once at the time of the year 7 interview Parent/caregiver report

 Not applicable

Rule-breaking behavior (CBCL)

The Achenbach Child Behavior Checklist assesses children’s emotional and behavioral problems. Researchers selected five subscales that aligned with constructs of interest: attention problems, rule breaking and aggressive behaviors, social problems, and the anxious-depressed and withdrawn-depressed syndrome scales. Parent/caregiver report

Not applicable

Social problems (CBCL)

The Child BehaviorChecklist for Ages6ndash;8(CBCL/6-18) assesses children’s emotional and behavioral problems. Researchers selected five subscales that aligned with constructs of interest: attention problems, rule breaking and aggressive behaviors, social problems, and the anxious-depressed and withdrawn-depressed syndrome scales.

Parent/caregiver report

Not reported by author

Withdrawn, depressed (CBCL)

The Child BehaviorChecklist for Ages6ndash;8(CBCL/6-18) assesses children’s emotional and behavioral problems. Researchers selected five subscales that aligned with constructs of interest: attention problems, rule breaking and aggressive behaviors, social problems, and the anxious-depressed and withdrawn-depressed syndrome scales.

Parent/caregiver report

Not reported by author

Healthy Families America (HFA)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance
BSID, Mental Development Index (MDI)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Year 1 Full sample, San Diego trial 422 children Mean = 105.00 Mean = 102.50 Mean difference = 2.50 HomeVEE calculated = 0.23 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
BSID, Motor MDI
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Year 1 Full sample, San Diego trial 422 children Mean = 113.50 Mean = 113.00 Mean difference = 0.50 HomeVEE calculated = 0.04 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
CBCL Aggressive T score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Year 3 Full sample, San Diego trial 382 children Mean = 53.50 Mean = 53.60 Mean difference = -0.10 HomeVEE calculated = -0.02 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
CBCL Anxious/Depressed T score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Year 3 Full sample, San Diego trial 382 children Mean = 53.50 Mean = 54.30 Mean difference = -0.80 HomeVEE calculated = -0.14 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
CBCL Behavior Problems
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Year 3 Full sample, San Diego trial 382 children Mean = 49.70 Mean = 51.10 Mean difference = -1.40 HomeVEE calculated = -0.15 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
CBCL Destructive T score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Year 3 Full sample, San Diego trial 382 children Mean = 53.60 Mean = 53.35 Mean difference = 0.30 HomeVEE calculated = 0.05 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
CBCL Externalizing problems T score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Year 3 Full sample, San Diego trial 382 children Mean = 49.40 Mean = 49.90 Mean difference = -0.50 HomeVEE calculated = -0.06 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
CBCL Internalizing problems T score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Year 3 Full sample, San Diego trial 382 children Mean = 50.90 Mean = 52.60 Mean difference = -1.70 HomeVEE calculated = -0.17 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
CBCL Sleep problems T score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Year 3 Full sample, San Diego trial 382 children Mean = 52.30 Mean = 52.70 Mean difference = -0.40 HomeVEE calculated = -0.09 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
CBCL Somatic problems T score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Year 3 Full sample, San Diego trial 382 children Mean = 53.80 Mean = 55.20 Mean difference = -1.40 HomeVEE calculated = -0.24 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
CBCL Withdrawn T score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Year 3 Full sample, San Diego trial 382 children Mean = 55.10 Mean = 56.10 Mean difference = -1.00 HomeVEE calculated = -0.13 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Stanford Binet Abstract/Visual Reasoning SAS
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Year 3 Full sample, San Diego trial 412 children Mean = 90.60 Mean = 90.50 Mean difference = 0.10 HomeVEE calculated = 0.01 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Stanford Binet Communication Survey
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Year 3 Full sample, San Diego trial 412 children Mean = 101.80 Mean = 101.90 Mean difference = -0.10 HomeVEE calculated = -0.01 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Stanford Binet Partial Composite
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Year 3 Full sample, San Diego trial 412 children Mean = 91.30 Mean = 91.30 Mean difference = 0.00 HomeVEE calculated = 0.00 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Stanford Binet Short Term Memory SAS
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Year 3 Full sample, San Diego trial 412 children Mean = 98.60 Mean = 97.80 Mean difference = 0.80 HomeVEE calculated = 0.08 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Stanford Binet Sum of Area SAS
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Year 3 Full sample, San Diego trial 412 children Mean = 326.90 Mean = 331.60 Mean difference = -4.70 HomeVEE calculated = -0.06 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Stanford Binet Verbal Reasoning Memory SAS
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Year 3 Full sample, San Diego trial 412 children Mean = 86.50 Mean = 87.30 Mean difference = -0.80 HomeVEE calculated = -0.07 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Show outcome measure summary
Outcome measure Outcome measure description Collection method Properties Operations links

BSID: MDI and PDI

The BSID tests the mental, motor, and behavioral development and abilities of young children. The researchers examined both the mental development and psychomotor development scales. Child assessment

Not reported by author

CBCL:

  • Anxious/Depressed
  • Withdrawn
  • Sleep problems
  • Somatic problems
  • Aggressive
  • Destructive
  • Behavior problems
  • Internalizing problems
  • Externalizing problems
The CBCL is a questionnaire that assesses behavioral problems in young children. The researchers analyzed subscales related to withdrawal, sleep, somatic, aggressiveness, destructiveness, internalizing, and externalizing problems and behaviors. Parent/caregiver report

Not reported by author

Stanford Binet:

  • Short Term Memory SAS
  • Abstract/Visual Reasoning SAS
  • Verbal Reasoning Memory SAS
  • Sum of Area SAS
  • Partial Composite
  • Communication Survey
The Stanford-Binet assesses intelligence in young children. The researchers examined abstract/visual reasoning, verbal reasoning memory, communication, and summary and composite measures of intelligence. Child assessment

Not reported by author

Findings rated moderate

Healthy Families America (HFA)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes

Child has IEP or 504 plan

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

8 years

HFM vs. comparison, Massachusetts Healthy Families Evaluation 2 (MHFE -2), Tier 6 full sample

370 children Unadjusted proportion = 0.27 Unadjusted proportion = 0.30 Mean difference = -0.02 HomeVEE calculated = -0.07

Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

Child in afterschool program

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

8 years

HFM vs. comparison, Massachusetts Healthy Families Evaluation 2 (MHFE -2), Tier 6 full sample

368 children Adjusted proportion = 0.55 Adjusted proportion = 0.42 Odds ratio = 1.71 HomeVEE calculated = 0.32

Statistically significant, p <.05

Effect size based on study OR

Submitted by barbara on Fri, 04/12/2019 - 18:55

HomVEE calculated the effect size based on the study-reported odds ratio.

Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire - externalizing

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

8 years

HFM vs. comparison, Massachusetts Healthy Families Evaluation 2 (MHFE -2), Tier 6 full sample

366 children Unadjusted mean = 5.58 Unadjusted mean = 5.60 Mean difference = -0.02 HomeVEE calculated = -0.01

Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire - internalizing

FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect

8 years

HFM vs. comparison, Massachusetts Healthy Families Evaluation 2 (MHFE -2), Tier 6 full sample

360 children Unadjusted mean = 3.48 Unadjusted mean = 3.51 Mean difference = -0.03 HomeVEE calculated = -0.01

Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

Show outcome measure summary
Outcome measure Outcome measure description Collection method Properties Operations links

Child has IEP or 504 plan

Mothers asked if child currently had an Individualized Education Plan or 504 Plan in place (target child)

Parent self-report

Not reported

Child in afterschool program

Mothers asked if target child currently participated in any afterschool programs (target child)

Parent self-report

Not reported

Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire - externalizing

Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire - Externalizing subscale

Self-report questionnaire

Not reported

Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire - internalizing

Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire - Internalizing subscale

Self-report questionnaire

Not reported

Healthy Families America (HFA)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance
ASQ Communication score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
6 months Program group children not affected by substance abuse,
NY Best Beginnings trial
359 children Mean = 55.70 Mean = 55.30 Mean difference = 0.40 HomeVEE calculated = 0.07 Statistical significance not reported
ASQ Composite score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
6 months Program group children not affected by substance abuse,
NY Best Beginnings trial
359 children Mean = 54.80 Mean = 54.00 Mean difference = 0.80 HomeVEE calculated = 0.15 Statistical significance not reported
ASQ Fine Motor score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
6 months Program group children not affected by substance abuse,
NY Best Beginnings trial
359 children Mean = 55.10 Mean = 54.20 Mean difference = 0.90 HomeVEE calculated = 0.12 Statistical significance not reported
ASQ Gross Motor score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
6 months Program group children not affected by substance abuse,
NY Best Beginnings trial
359 children Mean = 52.90 Mean = 51.80 Mean difference = 1.10 HomeVEE calculated = 0.12 Statistical significance not reported
ASQ Social score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
6 months Program group children not affected by substance abuse,
NY Best Beginnings trial
359 children Mean = 53.70 Mean = 54.20 Mean difference = -0.50 HomeVEE calculated = -0.06 Statistical significance not reported
Show outcome measure summary
Outcome measure Outcome measure description Collection method Properties Operations links

ASQ:

  • Communication score
  • Gross Motor score
  • Fine Motor score
  • Social score
  • Composite score
The ASQ assesses the status of development in young children. The researchers examined subscales related to communication, motor development, and social practices. Parent/caregiver report

Not reported by author

Healthy Families America (HFA)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance
PLS-3 Score
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Age 3 Children with developmental testing results, Hawaii trial 513 children Adjusted mean = 87.90 Adjusted mean = 87.10 Mean difference = 0.80 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Prevalence of any delays (PLS-3 score ≤ 85)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Age 3 Children with developmental testing results, Hawaii trial 513 children % (adjusted) = 48.00 Adjusted mean % = 49.00 OR = 0.97 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Prevalence of severe delays (PLS-3 score ≤ 70)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Age 3 Children with developmental testing results, Hawaii trial 513 children % (adjusted) = 9.00 Adjusted mean % = 11.00 OR = 0.80 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Show outcome measure summary
Outcome measure Outcome measure description Collection method Properties Operations links

PLS-3 score

The PLS assesses communication and language development in young children. The researchers examined the mean PLS score in addition to the prevalence of severe delays (PLS-3 score ≤ 70) and the prevalence of any language delays (PLS-3 score ≤ 85). Child assessment

Not reported by author

Healthy Families America (HFA)®
Show findings details
Outcome measure Effect Follow-up timing Sample Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
Days absent
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
1st grade Healthy Families New York (HFNY) RCT, Year 7 577 mother/child dyads = 16.36 = 15.28 Mean difference = 1.08 HomeVEE calculated = 1.37 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

footnote163

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

Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.

Doing poorly academically
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
1st grade Healthy Families New York (HFNY) RCT, Year 7 577 mother/child dyads = 0.30 = 0.33 Mean difference = -0.03 HomeVEE calculated = -0.07 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

footnote162

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

Negative value is favorable to the intervention.

Doing poorly academically - Any of the 3 behaviors that promote learning
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
1st grade Healthy Families New York (HFNY) RCT, Year 7 577 mother/child dyads = 0.15 = 0.16 Mean difference = -0.01 HomeVEE calculated = -0.03 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

footnote162

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

Negative value is favorable to the intervention.

Doing poorly academically - Reading or Math
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
1st grade Healthy Families New York (HFNY) RCT, Year 7 577 mother/child dyads = 0.21 = 0.25 Mean difference = -0.04 HomeVEE calculated = -0.14 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05

footnote162

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

Negative value is favorable to the intervention.

Excelling academically
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
1st grade Healthy Families New York (HFNY) RCT, Year 7 577 mother/child dyads = 0.26 = 0.20 Mean difference = 0.06 HomeVEE calculated = 0.19 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Excelling academically - All 3 behaviors that promote learning
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
1st grade Healthy Families New York (HFNY) RCT, Year 7 577 mother/child dyads = 0.13 = 0.08 Mean difference = 0.05 HomeVEE calculated = 0.36 Statistically significant, p < 0.05
Excelling academically - Reading and Math
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
1st grade Healthy Families New York (HFNY) RCT, Year 7 577 mother/child dyads = 0.16 = 0.16 Mean difference = 0.00 HomeVEE calculated = 0.01 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Retained in first grade
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
1st grade Healthy Families New York (HFNY) RCT, Year 7 577 mother/child dyads = 0.04 = 0.07 Mean difference = -0.04 HomeVEE calculated = -0.44 Statistically significant, p < 0.05

footnote162

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

Negative value is favorable to the intervention.

Show outcome measure summary
Outcome measure Outcome measure description Collection method Properties Operations links

Days absent

Mean number of days absent in the first grade First grade school record

Interrater agreement ranged from 89% to 99%

Doing poorly academically

Percentage of first-grade students whose best grade was below grade level in reading or math, or any of the behaviors that promote learning (working or playing cooperatively with others, following directions or classroom rules, or completing home or class work on time). First grade school record

Interrater agreement ranged from 89% to 99%

Doing poorly academically - Any of the 3 behaviors that promote learning

Percentage of first-grade students whose best grade was below grade level in any of the behaviors that promote learning (working or playing cooperatively with others, following directions or classroom rules, or completing home or class work on time). First grade school record

Interrater agreement ranged from 89% to 99%

Doing poorly academically - Reading or Math

Percentage of first-grade students whose best grade was below grade level in reading or math First grade school record

Interrater agreement ranged from 89% to 99%

Excelling academically

Percentage of first-grade students whose best grade was above grade level in either reading and math, or in all three behaviors that promote learning (working or playing cooperatively with others, following directions or classroom rules and completing home or class work on time). First grade school record

Interrater agreement ranged from 89% to 99%

Excelling academically - All 3 behaviors that promote learning

Percentage of first-grade students whose best grade was above grade level in all three behaviors that promote learning (working or playing cooperatively with others, following directions or classroom rules and completing home or class work on time). First grade school record

Interrater agreement ranged from 89% to 99%

Excelling academically - Reading and Math

Percentage of first-grade students whose best grade was above grade level in reading and math First grade school record

Interrater agreement ranged from 89% to 99%

Retained in first grade

Percentage of students who were retained in first grade First grade school record

Interrater agreement ranged from 89% to 99%

View Revisions