Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Last updated: October 2019

Effects Shown in Research & Outcome Measure Details

Family Economic Self-Sufficiency

Outcomes Rated High

Olds, D. L., Henderson Jr., C. R., Tatelbaum, R., & Chamberlin, R. (1986). Improving the delivery of prenatal care and outcomes of pregnancy: A randomized trial of nurse home visitation. Pediatrics, 77(1), 16.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type
Number of nutritional supplementation vouchers	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	32 weeks	Full (Elmira)	288 mothers	Mean = 2.18	Mean = 1.56	Mean difference = 0.62	Not available	Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.05	Secondary

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

Olds, D. L., Kitzman, H., Cole, R., Robinson, J., Sidora, K., Luckey, D. W., et al. (2004). Effects of nurse home-visiting on maternal life course and child development: Age 6 follow-up results of a randomized trial. Pediatrics, 114(6), 1550–1559

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type	Notes
SES of current job (mother)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	641 mothers	Adjusted mean = 14.01	Adjusted mean = 13.06	Mean difference = 0.95	Study reported = 0.05	Not statistically significant, p = 0.56	Secondary
SES of partner’s current job	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	641 mothers	Adjusted mean = 30.83	Adjusted mean = 31.63	Mean difference = -0.80	Study reported = -0.04	Not statistically significant, p = 0.70	Secondary
Has current partner (percentage)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	641 mothers	% (adjusted) = 78.00	Adjusted mean % = 77.00	OR = 1.10	Study reported = 0.06	Not statistically significant, p = 0.64	Secondary	footnote2 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Highest grade current partner completed	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	641 mothers	Adjusted mean = 12.16	Adjusted mean = 12.05	Mean difference = 0.11	Study reported = 0.07	Not statistically significant, p = 0.45	Secondary
Lives with father of child (not married)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	627 mothers	% (adjusted) = 2.00	Adjusted mean % = 2.00	Mean difference = 0.00	Study reported = 0.27	Not statistically significant, p = 0.09, Significance test performed jointly	Secondary
Lives with father of study child (percentage)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	641 mothers	% (adjusted) = 12.00	Adjusted mean % = 10.00	OR = 1.23	Study reported = 0.12	Not statistically significant, p = 0.45	Secondary	footnote2 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Married (percentage)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	641 mothers	% (adjusted) = 12.00	Adjusted mean % = 15.00	OR = 1.36	Study reported = -0.16	Not statistically significant, p = 0.18	Secondary	footnote2 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Married to father of child	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	627 mothers	% (adjusted) = 7.00	Adjusted mean % = 5.00	Mean difference = 2.00	Study reported = -0.02	Not statistically significant, p = 0.09, Significance test performed jointly	Secondary
Months mother employed (54–72 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	641 mothers	Adjusted mean = 9.96	Adjusted mean = 9.99	Mean difference = -0.03	Study reported = 0.00	Not statistically significant, p = 0.97	Secondary
Months of AFDC (54–72 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	641 mothers	Adjusted mean = 7.21	Adjusted mean = 8.96	Mean difference = -1.75	Study reported = -0.22	Statistically significant, p = 0.01	Secondary
Months of food stamps (54–72 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	641 mothers	Adjusted mean = 9.67	Adjusted mean = 11.50	Mean difference = -1.83	Study reported = -0.24	Statistically significant, p < 0.01	Secondary
Months of Medicaid, (54–72 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	641 mothers	Adjusted mean = 11.98	Adjusted mean = 13.08	Mean difference = -1.10	Study reported = -0.15	Not statistically significant, p = 0.08	Secondary
Months with current partner	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	641 mothers	Adjusted mean = 54.36	Adjusted mean = 45.00	Mean difference = 9.36	Study reported = 0.24	Statistically significant, p = 0.02	Secondary
Mother graduated from high school/earned GED (percentage)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	6-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	641 mothers	% (adjusted) = 69.00	Adjusted mean % = 66.00	OR = 1.12	Study reported = 0.07	Not statistically significant, p = 0.54	Secondary	footnote2 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Partnered with father of child (not married or cohabiting)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	627 mothers	% (adjusted) = 4.00	Adjusted mean % = 3.00	Mean difference = 1.00	Study reported = 0.25	Not statistically significant, p = 0.09, Significance test performed jointly	Secondary

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

Table Help

Outcome Measure	Outcome Measure Description	Collection method	Properties	Outcome Type
SES of current job	Percentile rank of the mother’s occupation estimated by calculating percentile rank for each occupation using Census categories and the median income and educational achievement associated with each occupation	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
SES of partner’s current job	Percentile rank of the mother’s current partner’s occupation estimated by calculating percentile rank for each occupation using Census categories and the median income and educational achievement associated with each occupation	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Has current partner	Percentage of mothers who were currently in a relationship with a partner	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Highest grade current partner completed	The highest year of school the mother’s current partner had completed	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Lives with father of study child	Percentage of mothers who lived with the father of the study’s focal child	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Married	Percentage of mothers who were married	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Months mother employed	Counts of the number of months the mother was employed	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Months on AFDC	Counts of the number of months the mother received AFDC	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Months on food stamps	Counts of the number of months the mother received food stamps	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Months on Medicaid	Counts of the number of months the mother received Medicaid	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Months with current partner	Counts of the number of months the mother had been in a relationship with her current partner	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Mother graduated from high school/earned GED	Percentage of mothers who had earned a high school diploma or GED	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary

Olds, D. L., Kitzman, H., Hanks, C., Cole, R., Anson, E., Sidora-Arcoleo, K., et al. (2007). Effects of nurse home visiting on maternal and child functioning: Age-9 follow-up of a randomized trial. Pediatrics, 120(4), e832–e845.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type
Married to father of child Lives with father of child (not married) Partnered with father of child (not married or cohabiting)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	627 mothers	<p>Married to father of child 7% (adjusted)</p><p>Lives with father of child (not married) 2% (adjusted)</p><p>Partnered with father of child (not married or cohabiting) 4% (adjusted)</p>	<p>Married to father of child 5% (adjusted)</p><p>Lives with father of child (not married) 2% (adjusted)</p><p>Partnered with father of child (not married or cohabiting) 3% (adjusted)</p>	Mean difference = 201.00	HomeVEE calculated = -0.02	Not statistically significant, p = 0.09 Significance test performed jointly	Secondary
Number of months employed per year (2–9 years postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	627 mothers	Adjusted mean = 3.84	Adjusted mean = 3.86	Mean difference = -0.02	Study reported = -0.01	Not statistically significant, p = 0.93	Secondary
Number of months employed per year (6–9 years postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	627 mothers	Adjusted mean = 6.86	Adjusted mean = 7.39	Mean difference = -0.53	Study reported = -0.15	Not statistically significant, p = 0.13	Secondary
Number of months on /TANFper year (0–9 years postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	627 mothers	Adjusted mean = 5.21	Adjusted mean = 5.92	Mean difference = -0.71	Study reported = -0.14	Statistically significant, p < 0.01	Secondary
Number of months on TANF(6–9 years postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	627 mothers	Adjusted mean = 3.39	Adjusted mean = 4.01	Mean difference = -0.62	Study reported = -0.12	Not statistically significant, p = 0.12	Secondary
Number of months on food stamps per year (0–9 years postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	627 mothers	Adjusted mean = 6.98	Adjusted mean = 7.80	Mean difference = -0.82	Study reported = -0.17	Statistically significant, p < 0.01	Secondary
Number of months on food stamps per year (6–9 years postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	627 mothers	Adjusted mean = 4.89	Adjusted mean = 5.92	Mean difference = -1.03	Study reported = -0.21	Statistically significant, p = 0.02	Secondary
Number of months on Medicaid per year (0–9 years postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	627 mothers	Adjusted mean = 9.71	Adjusted mean = 10.07	Mean difference = -0.36	Study reported = -0.09	Not statistically significant, p = 0.12	Secondary
Number of months on Medicaid per year (6–9 years postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	627 mothers	Adjusted mean = 8.79	Adjusted mean = 8.74	Mean difference = 0.05	Study reported = 0.01	Not statistically significant, p = 0.89	Secondary
Number of months with current partner (at 6 and 9 years postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	627 mothers	Adjusted mean = 51.89	Adjusted mean = 44.48	Mean difference = 7.41	Study reported = 0.23	Statistically significant, p < 0.01	Secondary
Number of months with current partner (at 9 year postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	627 mothers	Adjusted mean = 61.59	Adjusted mean = 52.40	Mean difference = 9.19	Study reported = 0.28	Statistically significant, p = 0.02	Secondary
Number of months with employed partner (at 6 and 9 years postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	627 mothers	Adjusted mean = 46.04	Adjusted mean = 38.43	Mean difference = 7.61	Study reported = 0.25	Statistically significant, p < 0.01	Secondary
Number of months with employed partner (at 9 years postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	627 mothers	Adjusted mean = 54.95	Adjusted mean = 46.01	Mean difference = 8.94	Study reported = 0.30	Statistically significant, p = 0.01	Secondary

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

Table Help

Outcome Measure	Outcome Measure Description	Collection method	Properties	Outcome Type
Lives with father of child	Percentage of unmarried mothers who lived with the father of the study’s focal child	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Married to father of child	Percentage of mothers who were married to the father of the study’s focal child	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Number of months employed per year	Counts of the number of months the mother was employed per year	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Number of months on AFDC/TANF per year	Counts of the number of months per year the mother received AFDC or TANF	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Number of months on food stamps per year	Counts of the number of months per year the mother received food stamps	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Number of months on Medicaid per year	Counts of the number of months per year the mother received Medicaid	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Number of months with current partner	Counts of the number of months the mother had been in a relationship with her current partner	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Number of months with employed partner	Counts of the number of months the mother had been in a relationship with an employed partner	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Number of months with employed partner	Counts of the number of months the mother had been in a relationship with an employed partner	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Partnered with father of child	Percentage of mothers who were in a relationship with the father of the study’s focal child but were not married or cohabitating with them	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary

Olds, D. L., Robinson, J., O’Brien, R., Luckey, D. W., Pettitt, L. M., Henderson, C. R., et al. (2002). Home visiting by paraprofessionals and by nurses: A randomized, controlled trial. Pediatrics, 110(3), 486.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type
Educational achievement (years)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	21 months	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	427 mothers	Adjusted mean = 11.51	Adjusted mean = 11.51	Mean difference = 0.00	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

Table Help

Outcome Measure	Outcome Measure Description	Collection method	Properties	Outcome Type
Educational achievement	The highest year of school the mother had completed	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Educational achievement	The highest year of school the mother had completed	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Months employed	Counts of the number of months the mother was employed. The outcome was measured for the periods of 1 to 12 months postpartum and 13 to 24 months postpartum.	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Months on AFDC	Counts of the number of months the mother received AFDC. The outcome was measured for the periods of 1 to 12 months postpartum and 13 to 24 months postpartum.	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary

Olds, D. L., Robinson, J., Pettitt, L., Luckey, D. W., Holmberg, J., Ng, R. K., et al. (2004). Effects of home visits by paraprofessionals and by nurses: Age 4 follow-up results of a randomized trial. Pediatrics, 114(6), 1560-1568.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type
Graduated from high school or earned GED	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	424 mothers	= 0.80	= 0.76	OR = 1.26	HomeVEE calculated = 0.14	Not statistically significant, p = 0.35	Secondary
Lives with father of child	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	424 mothers	= 0.41	= 0.43	OR = 0.92	HomeVEE calculated = -0.05	Not statistically significant, p = 0.69	Secondary
Lives with partner	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	424 mothers	= 0.58	= 0.61	OR = 0.90	HomeVEE calculated = -0.06	Not statistically significant, p = 0.61	Secondary
Married	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	424 mothers	= 0.39	= 0.44	OR = 0.80	HomeVEE calculated = -0.14	Not statistically significant, p = 0.28	Secondary
Months mother employed (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	424 mothers	Adjusted mean = 14.42	Adjusted mean = 13.38	Mean difference = 1.04	Study reported = 0.04	Not statistically significant, p = 0.22	Secondary
Months of AFDC (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	424 mothers	Adjusted mean = 1.88	Adjusted mean = 2.10	Mean difference = -0.22	Study reported = 0.01	Not statistically significant, p = 0.69	Secondary
Months of food stamps (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	424 mothers	Adjusted mean = 4.32	Adjusted mean = 3.98	Mean difference = 0.34	Study reported = 0.07	Not statistically significant, p = 0.67	Secondary
Months of Medicaid (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	424 mothers	Adjusted mean = 7.34	Adjusted mean = 6.98	Mean difference = 0.36	Study reported = -0.03	Not statistically significant, p = 0.71	Secondary
Months with current partner	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	424 mothers	Adjusted mean = 19.92	Adjusted mean = 20.14	Mean difference = -0.22	Study reported = 0.04	Not statistically significant, p = 0.81	Secondary

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

Table Help

Outcome Measure	Outcome Measure Description	Collection method	Properties	Outcome Type
Graduated from high school or earned GED	Percentage of mothers who had earned a high school diploma or GED	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Lives with father of child	Percentage of mothers who lived with the father of the study’s focal child	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Lives with partner	Percentage of mothers who lived with their current partner	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Married	Percentage of mothers who were married	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Months mother employed (25–48 months postpartum)	Counts of the number of months the mother was employed	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Months on AFDC (25–48 months postpartum)	Counts of the number of months the mother received AFDC	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Months on food stamps (25–48 months postpartum)	Counts of the number of months the mother received food stamps	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Months on Medicaid (25–48 months postpartum)	Counts of the number of months the mother received Medicaid	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Months with current partner	Counts of the number of months the mother had been in a relationship with her current partner	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary

Eckenrode, J., Campa, M., Luckey, D. W., Henderson, C. R., Cole, R., Kitzman, H., Anson, E., Sidora-Arcoleo, K., Powers, J., & Olds, D. (2010). Long-term effects of prenatal and infancy nurse home visitation on the life course of youths: 19-year follow-up of a randomized trial. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 164(1), 9-15.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type
Economically productive	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and infancy and comparison (Elmira)	231 children	% (adjusted) = 71.00	Adjusted mean % = 68.00	Difference = 0.03	HomeVEE calculated = 0.09	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Secondary
Economically productive	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	219 children	%(adjusted) = 73.00	Adjusted mean % = 68.00	Difference = 0.04	HomeVEE calculated = 0.13	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Secondary
Ever used AFDC	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and infancy and comparison (Elmira)	231 children	% (adjusted) = 3.00	Adjusted mean % = 2.00	Difference = 0.01	HomeVEE calculated = 0.26	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Secondary
Ever used AFDC	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	219 children	%(adjusted) = 6.00	Adjusted mean % = 2.00	Difference = 0.04	HomeVEE calculated = -0.68	Statistically significant, p < 0.05	Secondary
Ever used food stamps	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and infancy and comparison (Elmira)	231 children	%(adjusted) = 6.00	Adjusted mean % = 6.00	Difference = 0.00	HomeVEE calculated = 0.02	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Secondary
Ever used food stamps	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	219 children	%(adjusted) = 7.00	Adjusted mean % = 6.00	Difference = 0.01	HomeVEE calculated = 0.06	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Secondary
Ever used Medicaid	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and infancy and comparison (Elmira)	231 children	%(adjusted) = 11.00	Adjusted mean % = 12.00	Difference = -0.01	HomeVEE calculated = -0.06	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Secondary
Ever used Medicaid	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	19-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	219 children	%(adjusted) = 20.00	Adjusted mean % = 12.00	Difference = 0.07	HomeVEE calculated = 0.34	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Secondary

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

Table Help

Outcome Measure	Outcome Measure Description	Collection method	Properties	Outcome Type
Economically productive	Percentage of youth engaging in economically productive activities such as whether the youth was in school, the military, or job training or working full time at the time of the interview	Adolescent report	Not applicable	Secondary
Ever used AFDC	Percentage of youth that had received AFDC	Adolescent report	Not applicable	Secondary
Ever used food stamps	Percentage of youth that had received food stamps	Adolescent report	Not applicable	Secondary
Ever used Medicaid	Percentage of youth that had received Medicaid	Adolescent report	Not applicable	Secondary

Kitzman, H., Olds, D. L., Sidora, K., Henderson, C. R., Hanks, C., Cole, R., et al. (2000). Enduring effects of nurse home visitation on maternal life course: A 3-year follow-up of a randomized trial. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 283(15), 1983–1989.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type
Current socioeconomic status (percentile ranked by U.S. occupational codes)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	3-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	646 mothers	Adjusted mean = 15.62	Adjusted mean = 13.73	Mean difference = 1.89	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Highest education level	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	3-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	646 mothers	Adjusted mean = 11.61	Adjusted mean = 11.67	Mean difference = -0.06	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Living with father of child (percentage)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	3-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	646 mothers	% (adjusted) = 19.00	Adjusted mean % = 13.00	OR = 1.68	HomeVEE calculated = 0.29	Statistically significant, p = 0.03	Secondary
Living with partner (percentage)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	3-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	646 mothers	% (adjusted) = 43.00	Adjusted mean % = 32.00	OR = 1.64	HomeVEE calculated = 0.27	Statistically significant, p < 0.01	Secondary
Married (percentage)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	3-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	646 mothers	% (adjusted) = 15.00	Adjusted mean % = 10.00	OR = 1.56	HomeVEE calculated = 0.28	Not statistically significant, p = 0.09	Secondary
Number of months current partner employed	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	3-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	646 mothers	Adjusted mean = 35.15	Adjusted mean = 26.45	Mean difference = 8.70	Not available	Statistically significant, p = 0.04	Secondary
Number of months mother or child received AFDC (0–60 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	3-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	646 mothers	Adjusted mean = 32.55	Adjusted mean = 36.19	Mean difference = -3.64	Not available	Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.01	Primary
Number of months mother or child received food stamps (0–60 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	3-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	646 mothers	Adjusted mean = 41.57	Adjusted mean = 45.04	Mean difference = -3.47	Not available	Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.01	Primary
Number of months received WIC (0–54 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	3-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	646 mothers	Adjusted mean = 21.51	Adjusted mean = 23.33	Mean difference = -1.82	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Number of months received Medicaid (0–54 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	3-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	646 mothers	Adjusted mean = 39.59	Adjusted mean = 41.08	Mean difference = -1.49	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Number of months worked (0–54 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	3-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	646 mothers	Adjusted mean = 19.89	Adjusted mean = 18.84	Mean difference = 1.05	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

Table Help

Outcome Measure	Outcome Measure Description	Collection method	Properties	Outcome Type
Current SES	Percentile rank of the mother’s occupation estimated by calculating percentile rank for each occupation using Census categories and the median income and educational achievement associated with each occupation	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Highest education level	The highest year of school the mother had completed	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Living with father of child	Percentage of mothers who were living with the father of their child	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Living with partner	Percentage of mothers who were living with their partner	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Married	Percentage of mothers who were married	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Number of months current partner employed	Counts of the number of months the mother’s current partner was employed	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Number of months mother or child received AFDC	Counts of the number of months the mother received AFDC	Review of Tennessee Department of Human Services records	Not applicable	Primary
Number of months mother or child received food stamps	Counts of the number of months the mother received food stamps. The outcome was measured for the period of 0 to 60 months postpartum.	Review of Tennessee Department of Human Services records	Not applicable	Primary
Number of months received WIC	Counts of the number of months the mother received WIC	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Number of months received Medicaid	Counts of the number of months the mother received Medicaid	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Number of months worked	Counts of the number of months the mother was employed	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary

Kitzman, H., Olds, D. L., Henderson, C. R., Hanks, C., Cole, R., Tatelbaum, R., et al. (1997). Effect of prenatal and infancy home visitation by nurses on pregnancy outcomes, childhood injuries, and repeated childbearing. A randomized controlled trial. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 278(8), 644–652.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type	Notes
Employed during pregnancy	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	36th week of pregnancy	Full (Memphis)	916 mothers	% (adjusted) = 6.00	Adjusted mean % = 3.00	OR = 2.00	HomeVEE calculated = 0.44	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Secondary	footnote3 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Authors report the difference in this outcome to be statistically significant, p < 0.10, which is greater than the acceptable alpha for this review (α = 0.05).
In school during pregnancy	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	36th week of pregnancy	Full (Memphis)	916 mothers	% (adjusted) = 44.00	Adjusted mean % = 41.00	OR = 1.20	HomeVEE calculated = 0.07	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Secondary	footnote2 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.
Months on AFDC , 13–24 months postpartum	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	2 years postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	671 mothers	Adjusted mean = 7.80	Adjusted mean = 8.40	Mean difference = -0.60	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Primary	footnote3 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Authors report the difference in this outcome to be statistically significant, p < 0.10, which is greater than the acceptable alpha for this review (α = 0.05).
Months on AFDC , 0–12 months postpartum	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	2 years postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	681 mothers	Adjusted mean = 7.30	Adjusted mean = 7.60	Mean difference = -0.30	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Primary
Months worked, 0–12 months postpartum	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	2 years postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	681 mothers	Adjusted mean = 2.20	Adjusted mean = 1.70	Mean difference = 0.50	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Secondary
Months worked, 13–24 months postpartum	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	2 years postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and developmental screening comparison (Memphis)	671 mothers	Adjusted mean = 3.40	Adjusted mean = 3.40	Mean difference = 0.00	Not available	Not statistically significant, p > 0.05	Secondary
Used other community services	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	36th week of pregnancy	Full (Memphis)	916 mothers	% (adjusted) = 29.00	Adjusted mean % = 20.00	OR = 1.80	HomeVEE calculated = 0.30	Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.01	Secondary	footnote2 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance reported on authors’ calculations of the odds ratio.

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

Table Help

Outcome Measure	Outcome Measure Description	Collection method	Properties	Outcome Type
Employed during pregnancy	Percentage of women who were employed at 28 weeks gestation	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
In school during pregnancy	Percentage of women who were enrolled in school at 28 weeks gestation	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Months on AFDC	Counts of the number of months the mother received AFDC	Review of Tennessee Department of Human Services records	Not applicable	Primary
Months worked	Counts of the number of months the mother was employed	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Used other community services	Percentage of women who used other community services at 28 weeks’ gestation	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary

Olds, D. L., Eckenrode, J., Henderson, C. R., Kitzman, H., Powers, J., Cole, R., et al. (1997). Long-term effects of home visitation on maternal life course and child abuse and neglect. Fifteen-year follow-up of a randomized trial. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 278(8), 637–643.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type
Months employed	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	227 mothers	Adjusted mean = 87.50	Adjusted mean = 89.70	Mean difference = -2.20	Not available	Statistical significance not reported	Secondary
Months employed	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	245 mothers	Adjusted mean = 96.40	Adjusted mean = 89.70	Mean difference = 6.70	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Months receiving AFDC	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	227 mothers	Adjusted mean = 70.20	Adjusted mean = 65.90	Mean difference = 4.30	Not available	Statistical significance not reported	Secondary
Months receiving AFDC	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	245 mothers	Adjusted mean = 52.80	Adjusted mean = 65.90	Mean difference = -13.10	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Months receiving food stamps	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	227 mothers	Adjusted mean = 62.00	Adjusted mean = 56.40	Mean difference = 5.60	Not available	Statistical significance not reported	Secondary
Months receiving food stamps	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy, and comparison (Elmira)	245 mothers	Adjusted mean = 47.90	Adjusted mean = 56.40	Mean difference = -8.50	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Months receiving Medicaid	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	227 mothers	Adjusted mean = 71.10	Adjusted mean = 70.00	Mean difference = 1.10	Not available	Statistical significance not reported	Secondary
Months receiving Medicaid	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	15-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	245 mothers	Adjusted mean = 61.80	Adjusted mean = 70.00	Mean difference = -8.20	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

Table Help

Outcome Measure	Outcome Measure Description	Collection method	Properties	Outcome Type
Months employed	Counts of the number of months the mother was employed between the child’s birth and 15th year of life	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Months receiving AFDC	Counts of the number of months the mother received AFDC between the child’s birth and 15th year of life	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Months receiving food stamps	Counts of the number of months the mother received food stamps between the child’s birth and 15th year of life	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Months receiving Medicaid	Counts of the number of months the mother received Medicaid between the child’s birth and 15th year of life	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary

Olds, D. L., Henderson, Jr., C. R., Tatelbaum, R., & Chamberlin, R. (1988). Improving the lifecourse development of socially disadvantaged parents: A randomized trial of nurse home visitation. American Journal of Public Health, 78, 1436–1445.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type
Concern about finding work	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	10 months postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	195 mothers	Adjusted mean = 2.43	Adjusted mean = 2.17	Mean difference = 0.26	Not available	Statistical significance not reported	Secondary
Concern about finding work	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	10 months postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	202 mothers	Adjusted mean = 2.38	Adjusted mean = 2.17	Mean difference = 0.21	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Concern about finding work	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	22 months postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	192 mothers	Adjusted mean = 1.97	Adjusted mean = 1.92	Mean difference = 0.05	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Concern about finding work	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	22 months postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	183 mothers	Adjusted mean = 2.24	Adjusted mean = 1.92	Mean difference = 0.32	Not available	Statistical significance not reported	Secondary
Help with child care	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	10 months postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	197 mothers	Adjusted mean = 2.77	Adjusted mean = 2.64	Mean difference = 0.13	Not available	Statistical significance not reported	Secondary
Help with child care	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	10 months postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	204 mothers	Adjusted mean = 2.76	Adjusted mean = 2.64	Mean difference = 0.12	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Help with child care	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	22 months postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	189 mothers	Adjusted mean = 2.94	Adjusted mean = 2.76	Mean difference = 0.18	Not available	Statistical significance not reported	Secondary
Help with child care	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	22 months postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	197 mothers	Adjusted mean = 2.83	Adjusted mean = 2.76	Mean difference = 0.07	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Help with child care	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	46 months postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	167 mothers	Adjusted mean = 2.97	Adjusted mean = 3.00	Mean difference = -0.03	Not available	Statistical significance not reported	Secondary
Help with child care	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	46 months postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	183 mothers	Adjusted mean = 3.18	Adjusted mean = 3.00	Mean difference = 0.18	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Number of days on public assistance (0–22 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	22 months postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	185 mothers	Adjusted mean = 268.00	Adjusted mean = 244.00	Mean difference = 24.00	Not available	Statistical significance not reported	Secondary
Number of days on public assistance (0–22 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	22 months postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	194 mothers	Adjusted mean = 236.00	Adjusted mean = 244.00	Mean difference = -8.00	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Number of days on public assistance (0–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	48 months postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	196 mothers	Adjusted mean = 510.00	Adjusted mean = 530.00	Mean difference = -20.00	Not available	Statistical significance not reported	Secondary
Number of days on public assistance (0–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	48 months postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	208 mothers	Adjusted mean = 437.00	Adjusted mean = 530.00	Mean difference = -93.00	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Number of months employed (0–22 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	22 months postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	194 mothers	Adjusted mean = 6.15	Adjusted mean = 5.89	Mean difference = 0.26	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Number of months employed (0–22 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	22 months postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	185 mothers	Adjusted mean = 7.57	Adjusted mean = 5.89	Mean difference = 1.68	Not available	Statistical significance not reported	Secondary
Number of months employed (0–46 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	46 months postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy and comparison (Elmira)	196 mothers	Adjusted mean = 17.01	Adjusted mean = 12.65	Mean difference = 4.36	Not available	Statistical significance not reported	Secondary
Number of months employed (0–46 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	46 months postpartum	Nurse visited during pregnancy + infancy and comparison (Elmira)	208 mothers	Adjusted mean = 15.18	Adjusted mean = 12.65	Mean difference = 2.53	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

Table Help

Outcome Measure	Outcome Measure Description	Collection method	Properties	Outcome Type
Concern about finding work	Likert scale with a range of 1 to 4 indicating frequency of worrying about finding work	Parent/caregiver report	Not reported by author	Secondary
Help with child care	Scale ranging from 1 to 4 based on average frequency of help with specific child care tasks (e.g., diaper changing, dressing, toilet training, feeding, playing) provided by other family members and friends	Parent/caregiver report	Not reported by author	Secondary
Number of days on public assistance	Counts of the number of days the mother was on public assistance	Review of county records for mothers that were at-risk or reported use of public assistance and had not moved out of the county during the period. Otherwise, parent/caregiver report was used.	Not applicable	Secondary
Number of months employed	Counts of the number of months the mother was employed	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary

Olds, D. L., Kitzman, H. J., Cole, R. E., Hanks, C. A., Arcoleo, K. J., Anson, E. A., Luckey, D. W., Knudtson, M. D., Henderson, C. R., Bondy, J., & Stevenson, A. J. (2010). Enduring effects of prenatal and infancy home visiting by nurses on maternal life course and government spending: Follow-up of a randomized trial among children at age 12 years. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 164(5), 419-424

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type
Duration of current partner relationship	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	594 mothers	Adjusted mean = 77.44	Adjusted mean = 70.80	Mean difference = 6.64	HomeVEE calculated = 2.07	Not statistically significant, p > .05	Secondary
Duration of current partner relationship	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	6-, 9-, 12-year follow-ups	Nurse visited during pregnancy and infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	594 mothers	Adjusted mean = 59.58	Adjusted mean = 52.67	Mean difference = 6.91	HomeVEE calculated = 3.55	Statistically significant, p < .05	Secondary
Partnered with child's biological father	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	12-year follow-up	Nurse visited during pregnancy and infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	594 mothers	%(adjusted) = 10.00	Adjusted mean % = 7.00	OR = 1.51	HomeVEE calculated = 0.24	Not statistically significant, p > .05	Secondary
Time employed, in months	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	10 to 12 years	Nurse visited during pregnancy and infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	594 mothers	Adjusted mean = 7.10	Adjusted mean = 7.77	Mean difference = -0.67	HomeVEE calculated = -2.62	Not statistically significant, p > .05	Secondary
Time employed, in months	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	2 to 12 years	Nurse visited during pregnancy and infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	594 mothers	Adjusted mean = 4.50	Adjusted mean = 4.64	Mean difference = -0.14	HomeVEE calculated = -0.99	Not statistically significant, p > .05	Secondary
Use of AFDC-TANF	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	0 to 12 years	Nurse visited during pregnancy and infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis	594 mothers	Adjusted mean = 4.97	Adjusted mean = 5.47	Mean difference = -0.50	HomeVEE calculated = -3.03	Statistically significant, p < .05	Primary
Use of AFDC-TANF	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	10 to 12 years	Nurse visited during pregnancy and infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	594 mothers	Adjusted mean = 3.75	Adjusted mean = 3.97	Mean difference = -0.22	HomeVEE calculated = -13.10	Not statistically significant, p > .05	Primary
Use of food stamps	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	0 to 12 years	Nurse visited during pregnancy and infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	594 mothers	Adjusted mean = 6.27	Adjusted mean = 6.86	Mean difference = -0.59	HomeVEE calculated = -3.90	Statistically significant, p < .05	Primary
Use of food stamps	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	10 to 12 years	Nurse visited during pregnancy and infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	594 mothers	Adjusted mean = 4.46	Adjusted mean = 5.06	Mean difference = -0.60	HomeVEE calculated = -2.65	Not statistically significant, p > .05	Primary
Use of Medicaid	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	0 to 12 years	Nurse visited during pregnancy and infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	594 mothers	Adjusted mean = 8.08	Adjusted mean = 8.39	Mean difference = -0.31	HomeVEE calculated = -1.88	Not statistically significant, p > .05	Primary
Use of Medicaid	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	10 to 12 years	Nurse visited during pregnancy and infancy and development screening comparison (Memphis)	594 mothers	Adjusted mean = 6.02	Adjusted mean = 6.23	Mean difference = -0.21	HomeVEE calculated = -0.81	Not statistically significant, p > .05	Primary

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

Table Help

Outcome Measure	Outcome Measure Description	Collection method	Properties	Outcome Type
Duration of current partner relationship	Count of the number of months the mother has been in a relationship with her current partner	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Partnered with child's biological father	Percentage of mothers that were partnered with or married to the study child’s biologic father at the 12-year interview	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Time employed, in months	Count of the number of months the mother was employed from child age 2 to 12 years	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Use of AFDC-TANF	Count of the number of months per year the mother Aid to Families with Dependent Children and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families from birth through child age 12 years	Review of state records supplemented by parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Primary
Use of food stamps	Count of the number of months per year the mother received food stamps from birth through child age 12 years	Review of state records supplemented by parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Primary
Use of Medicaid	Count of the number of months per year the mother received Medicaid from birth through age child age 12 years	Review of state records supplemented by parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Primary

NFP with Paraprofessional Home Visitors

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type
Educational achievement (years)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	21 months	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	440 mothers	Adjusted mean = 11.62	Adjusted mean = 11.51	Mean difference = 0.11	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Months employed (1–12 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	12 months	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	425 mothers	Adjusted mean = 4.21	Adjusted mean = 3.97	Mean difference = 0.24	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Months employed (13–24 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	24 months	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	439 mothers	Adjusted mean = 6.14	Adjusted mean = 5.73	Mean difference = 0.41	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Months on AFDC (1–12 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	12 months	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	425 mothers	Adjusted mean = 2.60	Adjusted mean = 2.35	Mean difference = 0.25	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Months on AFDC (13–24 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	24 months	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	439 mothers	Adjusted mean = 2.31	Adjusted mean = 1.92	Mean difference = 0.39	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

Outcomes Rated Moderate

Hanks, Carole, Luckey, Dennis, Knudtson, Michael, Kitzman, Harriet, Anson, Elizabeth, Arcoleo, Kimberly, & Olds, David. (2011) Neighborhood context and the Nurse-Family Partnership. Unpublished report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice.

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type	Notes
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	12 years	Memphis, TN - Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	569 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 1.54	Unadjusted mean = 1.60	Mean difference = -0.06	Study reported = -0.04	p = 0.78	Primary	footnote162 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	15 years	Elmira, NY- Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	183 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.48	Unadjusted mean = 0.06	Mean difference = 0.42	Study reported = 0.42	p = 0.03	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	24 months	Elmira, NY- Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	205 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.32	Unadjusted mean = 0.45	Mean difference = -0.13	Study reported = -0.12	p = 0.54	Primary	footnote162 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	24 months	Memphis, TN - Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	657 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 2.30	Unadjusted mean = 2.21	Mean difference = 0.09	Study reported = 0.05	p = 0.7	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4 years	Elmira, NY- Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	214 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.36	Unadjusted mean = 0.44	Mean difference = -0.08	Study reported = -0.07	p = 0.72	Primary	footnote162 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4 years	Denver, CO- Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	414 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.10	Unadjusted mean = 0.06	Mean difference = 0.04	Study reported = 0.04	p = 0.72	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	54 months	Memphis, TN - Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	626 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 2.40	Unadjusted mean = 2.28	Mean difference = 0.12	Study reported = 0.06	p = 0.63	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	6 years	Memphis, TN - Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	627 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 1.86	Unadjusted mean = 2.04	Mean difference = -0.18	Study reported = -0.11	p = 0.38	Primary	footnote162 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	6 years	Denver, CO- Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	394 mothers	Unadjusted mean = -0.01	Unadjusted mean = -0.08	Mean difference = 0.07	Study reported = 0.12	p = 0.34	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9 years	Memphis, TN - Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	617 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 1.93	Unadjusted mean = 1.93	Mean difference = 0.00	Study reported = 0.00	p = 0.99	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9 years	Denver, CO- Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	357 mothers	Unadjusted mean = -0.15	Unadjusted mean = -0.17	Mean difference = 0.02	Study reported = 0.03	p = 0.84	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

Table Help

Outcome Measure	Outcome Measure Description	Collection method	Properties	Outcome Type	Operations links
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	Weighted average of the standardized values for the following percentages within Census tract and block group: (1) households below the federal poverty level (2) persons on public assistance (3) female-headed households with children (4) persons unemployed, and (5) share of population that is black.	U.S. Census Bureau - 1980, 1990, and 2000 censuses	Not reported by authors	Primary
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	An average of the standardized values for five elements in each Census tract and block group number: (1) percentage of households below the federal poverty level, (2) percentage of persons on public assistance, (3) percentage of female-headed households with children, (4) percentage of persons unemployed, (5) percentage of population that is black. This average was weighted by intervals between the Censuses when participant assessments were conducted. The weighted scores represent the degree of concentrated disadvantage in the neighborhood in terms of national averages, weighted by intervals to the Census.	Author calculation from public data	Not reported by author	Primary

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type	Notes
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	12 years	Memphis, TN - Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	569 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 1.54	Unadjusted mean = 1.60	Mean difference = -0.06	Study reported = -0.04	p = 0.78	Primary	footnote162 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	15 years	Elmira, NY- Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	183 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.48	Unadjusted mean = 0.06	Mean difference = 0.42	Study reported = 0.42	p = 0.03	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	24 months	Elmira, NY- Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	205 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.32	Unadjusted mean = 0.45	Mean difference = -0.13	Study reported = -0.12	p = 0.54	Primary	footnote162 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	24 months	Memphis, TN - Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	657 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 2.30	Unadjusted mean = 2.21	Mean difference = 0.09	Study reported = 0.05	p = 0.7	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4 years	Elmira, NY- Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	214 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.36	Unadjusted mean = 0.44	Mean difference = -0.08	Study reported = -0.07	p = 0.72	Primary	footnote162 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4 years	Denver, CO- Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	414 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.10	Unadjusted mean = 0.06	Mean difference = 0.04	Study reported = 0.04	p = 0.72	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	54 months	Memphis, TN - Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	626 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 2.40	Unadjusted mean = 2.28	Mean difference = 0.12	Study reported = 0.06	p = 0.63	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	6 years	Memphis, TN - Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	627 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 1.86	Unadjusted mean = 2.04	Mean difference = -0.18	Study reported = -0.11	p = 0.38	Primary	footnote162 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	6 years	Denver, CO- Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	394 mothers	Unadjusted mean = -0.01	Unadjusted mean = -0.08	Mean difference = 0.07	Study reported = 0.12	p = 0.34	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9 years	Memphis, TN - Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	617 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 1.93	Unadjusted mean = 1.93	Mean difference = 0.00	Study reported = 0.00	p = 0.99	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	9 years	Denver, CO- Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)	357 mothers	Unadjusted mean = -0.15	Unadjusted mean = -0.17	Mean difference = 0.02	Study reported = 0.03	p = 0.84	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

Table Help

Outcome Measure	Outcome Measure Description	Collection method	Properties	Outcome Type	Operations links
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	Weighted average of the standardized values for the following percentages within Census tract and block group: (1) households below the federal poverty level (2) persons on public assistance (3) female-headed households with children (4) persons unemployed, and (5) share of population that is black.	U.S. Census Bureau - 1980, 1990, and 2000 censuses	Not reported by authors	Primary
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	An average of the standardized values for five elements in each Census tract and block group number: (1) percentage of households below the federal poverty level, (2) percentage of persons on public assistance, (3) percentage of female-headed households with children, (4) percentage of persons unemployed, (5) percentage of population that is black. This average was weighted by intervals between the Censuses when participant assessments were conducted. The weighted scores represent the degree of concentrated disadvantage in the neighborhood in terms of national averages, weighted by intervals to the Census.	Author calculation from public data	Not reported by author	Primary

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type
Months employed (1–12 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	12 months	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	406 mothers	Adjusted mean = 4.35	Adjusted mean = 3.97	Mean difference = 0.38	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Months employed (13–24 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	24 months	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	419 mothers	Adjusted mean = 6.87	Adjusted mean = 5.73	Mean difference = 1.14	Not available	Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.05	Secondary
Months on AFDC (1–12 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	12 months	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	406 mothers	Adjusted mean = 2.31	Adjusted mean = 2.35	Mean difference = -0.04	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary
Months on AFDC (13–24 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	24 months	Nurse home visitor and comparison (Denver)	419 mothers	Adjusted mean = 1.95	Adjusted mean = 1.92	Mean difference = 0.03	Not available	Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05	Secondary

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

Table Help

Outcome Measure	Outcome Measure Description	Collection method	Properties	Outcome Type	Operations links
Months employed	Counts of the number of months the mother was employed	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary
Months on AFDC	Counts of the number of months the mother received AFDC	Parent/caregiver report	Not applicable	Secondary

NFP with Nurse Home Visitors - Mothers with low psychological resources subgroup

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type	Notes
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	12 years	Memphis, TN Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - low psychological resources	308 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 2.03	Unadjusted mean = 1.74	Mean difference = 0.29	Study reported = 0.19	p = 0.11	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	15 years	Elmira, NYNurseFamily Partnership (NFP) - high risk (unmarried, low SES)	78 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.57	Unadjusted mean = 0.52	Mean difference = 0.05	Study reported = 0.04	p = 0.86	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	24 months	Memphis, TN Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - low psychological resources	338 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 2.48	Unadjusted mean = 2.51	Mean difference = -0.03	Study reported = -0.02	p = 0.88	Primary	footnote162 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4 years	Elmira, NYNurseFamily Partnership (NFP) - high risk (unmarried, low SES)	100 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.83	Unadjusted mean = 0.91	Mean difference = -0.08	Study reported = -0.06	p = 0.79	Primary	footnote162 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4 years	Denver, CONurseFamily Partnership (NFP) - low psychological resources	152 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.18	Unadjusted mean = 0.40	Mean difference = -0.22	Study reported = -0.23	p = 0.16	Primary	footnote162 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	54 months	Memphis, TN Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - low psychological resources	325 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 2.52	Unadjusted mean = 2.71	Mean difference = -0.19	Study reported = -0.11	p = 0.35	Primary	footnote162 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	6 years	Memphis, TN Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - low psychological resources	332 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 2.84	Unadjusted mean = 2.34	Mean difference = 0.50	Study reported = 0.30	p = 0.01	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

NFP with Nurse Home Visitors - Mothers with low psychological resources subgroup

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type	Notes
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	12 years	Memphis, TN Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - low psychological resources	308 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 2.03	Unadjusted mean = 1.74	Mean difference = 0.29	Study reported = 0.19	p = 0.11	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	15 years	Elmira, NYNurseFamily Partnership (NFP) - high risk (unmarried, low SES)	78 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.57	Unadjusted mean = 0.52	Mean difference = 0.05	Study reported = 0.04	p = 0.86	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	24 months	Memphis, TN Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - low psychological resources	338 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 2.48	Unadjusted mean = 2.51	Mean difference = -0.03	Study reported = -0.02	p = 0.88	Primary	footnote162 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4 years	Elmira, NYNurseFamily Partnership (NFP) - high risk (unmarried, low SES)	100 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.83	Unadjusted mean = 0.91	Mean difference = -0.08	Study reported = -0.06	p = 0.79	Primary	footnote162 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4 years	Denver, CONurseFamily Partnership (NFP) - low psychological resources	152 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 0.18	Unadjusted mean = 0.40	Mean difference = -0.22	Study reported = -0.23	p = 0.16	Primary	footnote162 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	54 months	Memphis, TN Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - low psychological resources	325 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 2.52	Unadjusted mean = 2.71	Mean difference = -0.19	Study reported = -0.11	p = 0.35	Primary	footnote162 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Negative value is favorable to the intervention.
Neighborhood Disadvantage index	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	6 years	Memphis, TN Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) - low psychological resources	332 mothers	Unadjusted mean = 2.84	Unadjusted mean = 2.34	Mean difference = 0.50	Study reported = 0.30	p = 0.01	Primary	footnote163 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Positive value is favorable to the comparison group.

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

NFP with Paraprofessional Home Visitors

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type
Graduated from high school or earned GED	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	= 0.82	= 0.76	OR = 1.39	HomeVEE calculated = 0.20	Not statistically significant, p = 0.18	Secondary
Lives with father of child	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	= 0.33	= 0.43	OR = 0.64	HomeVEE calculated = -0.27	Statistically significant, p = 0.03	Secondary
Lives with partner	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	= 0.52	= 0.61	OR = 0.70	HomeVEE calculated = -0.21	Not statistically significant, p = 0.08	Secondary
Married	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	= 0.32	= 0.44	OR = 0.61	HomeVEE calculated = -0.31	Statistically significant, p = 0.02	Secondary
Months mother employed (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 15.13	Adjusted mean = 13.38	Mean difference = 1.75	Study reported = 0.11	Statistically significant, p = 0.04	Secondary
Months of AFDC (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 1.95	Adjusted mean = 2.10	Mean difference = -0.15	Study reported = -0.19	Not statistically significant, p = 0.78	Secondary
Months of food stamps (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 4.56	Adjusted mean = 3.98	Mean difference = 0.58	Study reported = 0.21	Not statistically significant, p = 0.47	Secondary
Months of Medicaid (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 8.08	Adjusted mean = 6.98	Mean difference = 1.10	Study reported = 0.02	Not statistically significant, p = 0.26	Secondary
Months with current partner	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 20.03	Adjusted mean = 20.14	Mean difference = -0.11	Study reported = 0.07	Not statistically significant, p = 0.91	Secondary

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

NFP with Paraprofessional Home Visitors

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type
Graduated from high school or earned GED	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	= 0.82	= 0.76	OR = 1.39	HomeVEE calculated = 0.20	Not statistically significant, p = 0.18	Secondary
Lives with father of child	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	= 0.33	= 0.43	OR = 0.64	HomeVEE calculated = -0.27	Statistically significant, p = 0.03	Secondary
Lives with partner	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	= 0.52	= 0.61	OR = 0.70	HomeVEE calculated = -0.21	Not statistically significant, p = 0.08	Secondary
Married	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	= 0.32	= 0.44	OR = 0.61	HomeVEE calculated = -0.31	Statistically significant, p = 0.02	Secondary
Months mother employed (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 15.13	Adjusted mean = 13.38	Mean difference = 1.75	Study reported = 0.11	Statistically significant, p = 0.04	Secondary
Months of AFDC (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 1.95	Adjusted mean = 2.10	Mean difference = -0.15	Study reported = -0.19	Not statistically significant, p = 0.78	Secondary
Months of food stamps (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 4.56	Adjusted mean = 3.98	Mean difference = 0.58	Study reported = 0.21	Not statistically significant, p = 0.47	Secondary
Months of Medicaid (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 8.08	Adjusted mean = 6.98	Mean difference = 1.10	Study reported = 0.02	Not statistically significant, p = 0.26	Secondary
Months with current partner	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 20.03	Adjusted mean = 20.14	Mean difference = -0.11	Study reported = 0.07	Not statistically significant, p = 0.91	Secondary

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

NFP with Paraprofessional Home Visitors

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type
Graduated from high school or earned GED	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	= 0.82	= 0.76	OR = 1.39	HomeVEE calculated = 0.20	Not statistically significant, p = 0.18	Secondary
Lives with father of child	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	= 0.33	= 0.43	OR = 0.64	HomeVEE calculated = -0.27	Statistically significant, p = 0.03	Secondary
Lives with partner	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	= 0.52	= 0.61	OR = 0.70	HomeVEE calculated = -0.21	Not statistically significant, p = 0.08	Secondary
Married	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	= 0.32	= 0.44	OR = 0.61	HomeVEE calculated = -0.31	Statistically significant, p = 0.02	Secondary
Months mother employed (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 15.13	Adjusted mean = 13.38	Mean difference = 1.75	Study reported = 0.11	Statistically significant, p = 0.04	Secondary
Months of AFDC (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 1.95	Adjusted mean = 2.10	Mean difference = -0.15	Study reported = -0.19	Not statistically significant, p = 0.78	Secondary
Months of food stamps (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 4.56	Adjusted mean = 3.98	Mean difference = 0.58	Study reported = 0.21	Not statistically significant, p = 0.47	Secondary
Months of Medicaid (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 8.08	Adjusted mean = 6.98	Mean difference = 1.10	Study reported = 0.02	Not statistically significant, p = 0.26	Secondary
Months with current partner	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 20.03	Adjusted mean = 20.14	Mean difference = -0.11	Study reported = 0.07	Not statistically significant, p = 0.91	Secondary

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

NFP with Paraprofessional Home Visitors

Show Study Effects Details

Table Help

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up Timing	Sample	Sample Size	Program Group	Comparison Group	Group Difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Outcome Type
Graduated from high school or earned GED	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	= 0.82	= 0.76	OR = 1.39	HomeVEE calculated = 0.20	Not statistically significant, p = 0.18	Secondary
Lives with father of child	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	= 0.33	= 0.43	OR = 0.64	HomeVEE calculated = -0.27	Statistically significant, p = 0.03	Secondary
Lives with partner	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	= 0.52	= 0.61	OR = 0.70	HomeVEE calculated = -0.21	Not statistically significant, p = 0.08	Secondary
Married	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	= 0.32	= 0.44	OR = 0.61	HomeVEE calculated = -0.31	Statistically significant, p = 0.02	Secondary
Months mother employed (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 15.13	Adjusted mean = 13.38	Mean difference = 1.75	Study reported = 0.11	Statistically significant, p = 0.04	Secondary
Months of AFDC (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 1.95	Adjusted mean = 2.10	Mean difference = -0.15	Study reported = -0.19	Not statistically significant, p = 0.78	Secondary
Months of food stamps (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 4.56	Adjusted mean = 3.98	Mean difference = 0.58	Study reported = 0.21	Not statistically significant, p = 0.47	Secondary
Months of Medicaid (25–48 months postpartum)	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 8.08	Adjusted mean = 6.98	Mean difference = 1.10	Study reported = 0.02	Not statistically significant, p = 0.26	Secondary
Months with current partner	FavorableUnfavorableNo Effect	4-year follow-up	Paraprofessional home visitor and comparison (Denver)	431 mothers	Adjusted mean = 20.03	Adjusted mean = 20.14	Mean difference = -0.11	Study reported = 0.07	Not statistically significant, p = 0.91	Secondary

Show Study Outcome Measure Summary

View Revisions

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)®

Effects Shown in Research & Outcome Measure Details

Family Economic Self-Sufficiency

Outcomes Rated High

Outcomes Rated Moderate

Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP)^®