Manuscript Detail

View Revisions

Mitchell-Herzfeld, S., Izzo, C., Greene, R., Lee, E., & Lowenfels, A. (2005). Evaluation of Healthy Families New York (HFNY): First year program impacts. Albany, NY: University at Albany, Center for Human Services Research.

Manuscript screening details
Screening decision Screening conclusion HomVEE procedures and standards version
Passes screens Eligible for review Version 1
Study design details
Rating Design Attrition Baseline equivalence Compromised randomization Confounding factors Valid, reliable measure(s)
Moderate Randomized controlled trial High Established on race/ethnicity, SES, and feasible outcomes. Statistical controls for feasible baseline outcomes included. None None Not assessed in manuscripts reviewed before 2021
Notes:

In 2020, HomVEE updated this review to move "Mother has health insurance" from the Maternal Health domain to the Family Economic Self-Sufficiency domain because ACF determined that health insurance coverage belongs in that domain. 

In 2020, HomVEE updated this review to move "Child has health insurance" from the Child Health domain to the Family Economic Self-Sufficiency domain because ACF determined that health insurance coverage belongs in that domain. 

footnote81

Submitted by user on

Attrition rating is based on overall sample sizes because sample sizes for treatment and control groups were unavailable.

Study characteristics
Study participants Recruitment for the randomized controlled trial of Healthy Families New York (HFNY) occurred between March 2000 and August 2001. Pregnant women or parents with an infant 3 months of age or less who were found to be at risk for child abuse or neglect and lived in communities with high rates of teen pregnancy, infant mortality, and welfare receipt, and low rates of prenatal care were referred to HFNY. Consenting families were screened using the Kempe Family Stress Checklist (FSC); 1,297 eligible families who received scores of 25 or higher on the FSC were randomly assigned to the program group (n = 647) or the comparison group (n = 650). 1,157 mothers completed a baseline interview (589 in the program group and 568 in the comparison group). Of those who completed baseline interviews, 41.9% were African American, 17.0% were Latina, 33.7% were White, and the remaining 7.3% were of another race or ethnicity. On average, the mothers were 22.4 years of age, 52.3% had not completed high school or a GED , and 32.4% of the families were receiving welfare. This study reports on the first-year program impacts of HFNY, using a sample of 1,060 families who completed the first follow-up interview.
Setting Three Healthy Families New York sites were included in the study: Erie, Rensselaer, and Ulster counties. Erie serves primarily African American and Latino families in inner-city neighborhoods in Buffalo. Rensselaer and Ulster counties include urban, suburban, and rural locations; both serve largely White families, but with a substantial African American population in Rensselaer and Latino population in Ulster.
Intervention services Participants in the program group were assigned to an HFNY home visitor. Home visitors were scheduled to visit families biweekly during pregnancy (if they enrolled prior to the birth of the child) and at least weekly immediately following the birth of the child. The frequency of visits was gradually decreased based on family needs, and visits continued until the child turned 5 or began Head Start or kindergarten. Home visitors emphasized activities to improve the parent-child relationship, help parents understand child development and improve child growth, improve access to health care, and improve family functioning through the development and use of a Family Support Plan.
Comparison conditions Members of the control group received information about and referrals to other community services, though they were not referred to home visiting services that were similar to HFNY (DuMont et al., 2008).
Subgroups examined This field lists subgroups examined in the manuscript (even if they were not replicated in other samples and not reported on the summary page for this model’s report).

• Parity (primiparous) • Maternal age (less than 18 years or 18 and older) • Maternal depression (low, moderate, or high based on screening) • Intimate partner violence (reported violence in year prior to enrollment or did not report violence) • Mother reports being victim of maltreatment during own childhood (yes or no)

Funding sources New York State Office of Children and Families Services, Bureau of Evaluation and Research
Author affiliation None of the study authors are developers of this model.
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed status is not listed for manuscripts reviewed before 2021.

Findings that rate moderate or high

Child health
Rating Outcome measure Effect Sample Timing of follow-up Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
Moderate Child ever without needed medical care
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,061 children % = 2.20 % = 1.40 Not reported HomVEE calculated = 0.28 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Child has primary care provider
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,061 children % = 98.40 % = 98.60 = -0.20 HomVEE calculated = -0.08 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Mother breastfed baby
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,060 mothers % = 45.90 % = 44.70 = 1.20 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Number of months breastfed
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,060 mothers Adjusted mean = 1.01 Adjusted mean = 1.04 Mean difference = -0.03 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Number of well-baby visits
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,061 children Adjusted mean = 4.54 Adjusted mean = 4.61 Mean difference = -0.07 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Family economic self-sufficiency
Rating Outcome measure Effect Sample Timing of follow-up Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
Moderate Child has health insurance
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,061 children % = 93.90 % = 90.40 = 3.50 HomVEE calculated = 0.30 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Moderate Education appropriate for age
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY trial Year 1 1,061 families % = 57.50 % = 60.30 = -2.80 HomVEE calculated = -0.07 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Moderate Family received TANF
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY trial Year 1 1,061 families % = 35.00 % = 30.40 = 4.60 HomVEE calculated = 0.13 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Family received WIC
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY trial Year 1 1,061 families % = 74.80 % = 72.20 = 2.60 HomVEE calculated = 0.08 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Family received 50% income from work
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY trial Year 1 1,061 families % = 51.20 % = 56.60 = -5.40 HomVEE calculated = -0.13 Not statistically significant,
p > 0.05
Moderate Mother employed
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY trial Year 1 1,061 families % = 40.80 % = 47.60 = 6.80 HomVEE calculated = -0.17 Statistically significant,
p < 0.05
Moderate Mother has health insurance
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,061 mothers % (adjusted) = 80.10 Adjusted mean % = 78.40 = 1.70 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Maternal health
Rating Outcome measure Effect Sample Timing of follow-up Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
Moderate Above alcohol abuse cutoff (AUDIT)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,061 mothers % (adjusted) = 2.00 Adjusted mean % = 3.80 = -1.80 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Above depression threshold (CES-D)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,061 mothers % (adjusted) = 29.00 Adjusted mean % = 31.20 = -2.20 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Alcohol abuse (AUDIT)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,061 mothers Adjusted mean = 1.14 Adjusted mean = 1.28 Mean difference = -0.14 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Depressive symptoms (CES-D)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,061 mothers Adjusted mean = 11.45 Adjusted mean = 11.61 Mean difference = -0.16 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Drug use
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,061 mothers % (adjusted) = 9.80 Adjusted mean % = 10.60 = -0.80 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Mother has primary care physician
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,061 mothers % (adjusted) = 86.90 Adjusted mean % = 85.00 = 1.90 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Sense of personal mastery (PSM)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,061 mothers Adjusted mean = 23.80 Adjusted mean = 23.55 Mean difference = 0.25 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Smoking
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,061 mothers % (adjusted) = 41.30 Adjusted mean % = 43.80 = -2.50 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Smoking frequency
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,061 mothers Adjusted mean = 3.42 Adjusted mean = 3.93 Mean difference = -0.51 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Positive parenting practices
Rating Outcome measure Effect Sample Timing of follow-up Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
Moderate Attitudes: Empathy (AAPI-2)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY trial Year 1 1,060 mothers Adjusted mean = 37.12 Adjusted mean = 36.64 Mean difference = 0.48 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Attitudes: Inappropriate expectations (AAPI-2)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY trial Year 1 1,060 mothers Adjusted mean = 19.11 Adjusted mean = 18.83 Mean difference = 0.28 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Attitudes: Physical punishment (AAPI-2)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY trial Year 1 1,060 mothers Adjusted mean = 38.43 Adjusted mean = 38.01 Mean difference = 0.42 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Attitudes: Power/independence (AAPI-2)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY trial Year 1 1,060 mothers Adjusted mean = 19.39 Adjusted mean = 19.40 Mean difference = -0.01 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Attitudes: Role reversal (AAPI-2)
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY trial Year 1 1,060 mothers Adjusted mean = 23.59 Adjusted mean = 23.24 Mean difference = 0.35 Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Moderate Child safety checklist
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY trial Year 1 1,060 mothers % = 86.10 % = 85.90 Not reported Not available Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Reductions in child maltreatment
Rating Outcome measure Effect Sample Timing of follow-up Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
Moderate ER visits due to injury or ingestion
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Full sample, NY Trial Year 1 1,061 children % = 3.80 % = 6.20 = -2.40 HomVEE calculated = -0.31 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05