Skip to main content



Child-Maltreatment-Research-L (CMRL) List Serve

Database of Past CMRL Messages

Welcome to the database of past Child-Maltreatment-Research-L (CMRL) list serve messages. The table below contains all past CMRL messages (text only, no attachments) from Nov. 20, 1996 - March 6, 2018 and is updated quarterly.

Instructions: Postings are listed for browsing with the newest messages first. Click on the linked ID number to see a message. You can search the author, subject, message ID, and message content fields by entering your criteria into this search box:

Message ID: 8301
Date: 2009-11-11

Author:Brodowski, Melissa (ACF)

Subject:FYI: Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness (HomeVEE) Call for Studies

Dear Colleagues – Please see the notice below. This project is funded by the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning Research and Evaluation. See below for more details and the contact information for any questions. Thank you. Melissa Lim Brodowski, MSW, MPH Office on Child Abuse and Neglect Children's Bureau, ACYF, ACF, HHS 1250 Maryland Ave, SW 8th Floor #8111 Washington, DC 20024 Phone: 202-205-2629 Fax: 202-260-9345 Email: melissa.brodowski@acf.hhs.gov Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness (HomVEE) Draft Call for Studies SUBMISSION DEADLINE: NOVEMBER 27, 2009 Purpose Mathematica Policy Research® seeks studies for a comprehensive review of the evidence base for home visiting programs. The review is being conducted for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) by Mathematica Policy Research (and subcontractor Dr. Brenda Jones Harden) and will be used to help inform policy, new initiatives, and program directions at the federal level. Submissions are due by November 27, 2009. Background Home visiting as a program delivery vehicle continues to expand due in part to research supporting the primacy of early experiences, social learning, and the parent-child relationship (Daro 2006; DiLauro 2009; Meltzoff et al. 2009). Increasingly, federal policymakers are funding evidence-based program models as part of efforts to make smarter investments in education, health care, and social services (see ACF 2007). Rigorous evaluations of home visitation programs have shown improvements in child and family outcomes. Many states are also focusing on implementing evidence-based programs, and state funding has supported some national models of home visiting. A recent state survey found that 40 of 46 responding states implemented at least one home visiting program (Johnson 2009). However, there is a lack of clear, concise information available about the evidence base for many of the programs being implemented. Some are locally developed and have not yet been rigorously evaluated. On balance, the evidence of effectiveness of specific home visiting models, from meta-analyses and other reviews (Bilukha et al. 2005; Gomby 2005; Olds et al. 2004; Sweet and Applebaum 2004) and from individual evaluations, is mixed: some models demonstrate significant and meaningful impacts on their targeted outcomes under some conditions and others demonstrate modest to no impact. To identify the home visiting programs that have evidence of effectiveness, on behalf of HHS, Mathematica is conducting a comprehensive review of the evidence base. With the intent of assessing the research on home visiting, Mathematica will limit the literature search to programs that include this approach as the primary service delivery strategy. Programs that are primarily center-based with infrequent or supplemental home visiting will be excluded. Home visiting services should be offered to most or all participants and should be integral to programmatic goals. Visits should occur solely or primarily where participating families reside but occasionally may occur elsewhere if the families are homeless or uncomfortable conducting visits in the home. The services may be voluntary or mandated (for example, court ordered). The home visiting services in studies included in this review must occur either during the mother’s pregnancy or after the child is born and prior to school entry, roughly from birth to age 5, and be focused on improving the well-being of the child(ren) and family. Therefore, the review will focus on programs that target at least one of the following outcome domains: * Maternal and child heath, such as preventing premature births or increasing preventative doctor visits and immunizations * Child development and school readiness, which may encompass cognitive skills, language development, social-emotional development, or physical development * Reductions in child maltreatment, such as reducing child abuse and neglect, and in childhood injury prevention * Reductions in juvenile delinquency, family violence, and crime * Positive parenting practices to support children’s development, including parent training programs designed to address children’s behavior problems and school readiness * Family economic factors and coordination with community resources, including employment, food security, and public assistance receipt (when in conjunction with a focus on child or parent outcomes) ELIGIBILITY This call for studies is particularly aimed at identifying unpublished manuscripts (past or recent), conference papers, or new publications (currently in press) that are not included in existing research syntheses and databases. Apart from the call for studies, the Mathematica team will conduct keyword searches of electronic databases, searches for studies on websites of research and policy organizations with links to home visiting, and other search activities. All relevant studies from these searches will be included in our review, supplemented with additional studies identified through this call. Studies submitted in response to this call should: * Focus on home visiting programs targeted to pregnant women and families with children ages birth to 5. * Have been prepared or published in 1979 or later. * Provide the name and a detailed description of the home visiting program being evaluated, as well as the study methods employed. * Target at least one of the outcome domains described above Submission Instructions Submissions should be e-mailed to mailto:HVEE@mathematica-mpr.com Submissions should include the following: * An electronic version of the study in MS Word or PDF format * A cover e-mail noting contact information for the lead or corresponding author, the name of the home visiting program being evaluated, and the study design—randomized control trial, quasi-experimental with a comparison group, non-experimental (such as pre-post or correlational), or implementation The deadline for submissions is November 27, 2009. Authors will receive acknowledgment of receipt of their submission but no indication of the possible inclusion of their study in the review. REFERENCES Administration for Children and Families. “Guidelines for CBCAP Lead Agencies on Evidence-Based and Evidence Informed Programs and Practices: Learning Along the Way.” Working Paper. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, revised November 13, 2007. Bilukha, Oleg, Robert A. Hahn, Alex Crosby, Mindy T. Fullilove, Akiva Liberman, Eve Moscicki, Susan Snyder, Farris Tuma, Phaedra Corso, Amanda Schofield, and Peter A. Briss. “The Effectiveness of Early Childhood Home Visitation in Preventing Violence: A Systematic Review.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine, vol. 28, no. 2, 2005, pp. 11–39. Daro, Deborah. “Home Visitation: Assessing Progress, Managing Expectations.” Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall Center for Children, 2006. Daro, Deborah, and Anne C. Donnelly. “Charting the Waves of Prevention: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back.” Child Abuse & Neglect, vol. 26, no. 6, 2002, pp. 731–742. DiLauro, Elizabeth. “Reaching Families Where They Live: Supporting Parents and Child Development Through Home Visiting.” Zero to Three, February, 2009. Gomby, Deanna S. “Home Visitation in 2005: Outcomes for Children and Parents.” Invest in Kids Working Paper No. 7. Washington, DC: Committee for Economic Development, July 2005. Johnson, K. “State-based Home Visiting: Strengthening Programs Through State Leadership.” New York: National Center for Children in Poverty, 2009. Available at http://www.nachc.com/client/documents/PCA%20Updates/3172009/homevisit_final_text_862.pdf. Accessed June 4, 2009. Meltzoff, Andrew N., Patricia K. Kuhl, Javier Movellan, and Terrence J. Sejnowski. “Foundations for a New Science of Learning.” Science, vol. 325, no. 5938, 2009, pp. 284–288. Olds, D. L., J. Robinson, L. Pettitt, D. W. Luckey, J. Holmberg, R. K. Ng, K. Isacks, K. Sheff, and C. R. Henderson. “Effects of Home Visits by Paraprofessionals and By Nurses: Age 4 Follow-up Results of a Randomized Trial.” Pediatrics, vol. 114, no. 6, 2004, pp. 1560–1568. Sweet, Monica A., and Mark I. Appelbaum. “Is Home Visiting an Effective Strategy? A Meta-Analytic Review of Home Visiting Programs for Families with Young Children.” Child Development, vol. 75, no. 5, 2004, pp. 1435–1456.

Dear Colleagues – Please see the notice below. This project is funded by the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning Research and Evaluation. See below for more details and the contact information for any questions. Thank you. Melissa Lim Brodowski, MSW, MPH Office on Child Abuse and Neglect Children's Bureau, ACYF, ACF, HHS 1250 Maryland Ave, SW 8th Floor #8111 Washington, DC 20024 Phone: 202-205-2629 Fax: 202-260-9345 Email: melissa.brodowskiacf.hhs.gov Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness (HomVEE) Draft Call for Studies SUBMISSION DEADLINE: NOVEMBER 27, 2009 Purpose Mathematica Policy Research® seeks studies for a comprehensive review of the evidence base for home visiting programs. The review is being conducted for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) by Mathematica Policy Research (and subcontractor Dr. Brenda Jones Harden) and will be used to help inform policy, new initiatives, and program directions at the federal level. Submissions are due by November 27, 2009. Background Home visiting as a program delivery vehicle continues to expand due in part to research supporting the primacy of early experiences, social learning, and the parent-child relationship (Daro 2006; DiLauro 2009; Meltzoff et al. 2009). Increasingly, federal policymakers are funding evidence-based program models as part of efforts to make smarter investments in education, health care, and social services (see ACF 2007). Rigorous evaluations of home visitation programs have shown improvements in child and family outcomes. Many states are also focusing on implementing evidence-based programs, and state funding has supported some national models of home visiting. A recent state survey found that 40 of 46 responding states implemented at least one home visiting program (Johnson 2009). However, there is a lack of clear, concise information available about the evidence base for many of the programs being implemented. Some are locally developed and have not yet been rigorously evaluated. On balance, the evidence of effectiveness of specific home visiting models, from meta-analyses and other reviews (Bilukha et al. 2005; Gomby 2005; Olds et al. 2004; Sweet and Applebaum 2004) and from individual evaluations, is mixed: some models demonstrate significant and meaningful impacts on their targeted outcomes under some conditions and others demonstrate modest to no impact. To identify the home visiting programs that have evidence of effectiveness, on behalf of HHS, Mathematica is conducting a comprehensive review of the evidence base. With the intent of assessing the research on home visiting, Mathematica will limit the literature search to programs that include this approach as the primary service delivery strategy. Programs that are primarily center-based with infrequent or supplemental home visiting will be excluded. Home visiting services should be offered to most or all participants and should be integral to programmatic goals. Visits should occur solely or primarily where participating families reside but occasionally may occur elsewhere if the families are homeless or uncomfortable conducting visits in the home. The services may be voluntary or mandated (for example, court ordered). The home visiting services in studies included in this review must occur either during the mother’s pregnancy or after the child is born and prior to school entry, roughly from birth to age 5, and be focused on improving the well-being of the child(ren) and family. Therefore, the review will focus on programs that target at least one of the following outcome domains: * Maternal and child heath, such as preventing premature births or increasing preventative doctor visits and immunizations * Child development and school readiness, which may encompass cognitive skills, language development, social-emotional development, or physical development * Reductions in child maltreatment, such as reducing child abuse and neglect, and in childhood injury prevention * Reductions in juvenile delinquency, family violence, and crime * Positive parenting practices to support children’s development, including parent training programs designed to address children’s behavior problems and school readiness * Family economic factors and coordination with community resources, including employment, food security, and public assistance receipt (when in conjunction with a focus on child or parent outcomes) ELIGIBILITY This call for studies is particularly aimed at identifying unpublished manuscripts (past or recent), conference papers, or new publications (currently in press) that are not included in existing research syntheses and databases. Apart from the call for studies, the Mathematica team will conduct keyword searches of electronic databases, searches for studies on websites of research and policy organizations with links to home visiting, and other search activities. All relevant studies from these searches will be included in our review, supplemented with additional studies identified through this call. Studies submitted in response to this call should: * Focus on home visiting programs targeted to pregnant women and families with children ages birth to 5. * Have been prepared or published in 1979 or later. * Provide the name and a detailed description of the home visiting program being evaluated, as well as the study methods employed. * Target at least one of the outcome domains described above Submission Instructions Submissions should be e-mailed to mailto:HVEEmathematica-mpr.com Submissions should include the following: * An electronic version of the study in MS Word or PDF format * A cover e-mail noting contact information for the lead or corresponding author, the name of the home visiting program being evaluated, and the study design—randomized control trial, quasi-experimental with a comparison group, non-experimental (such as pre-post or correlational), or implementation The deadline for submissions is November 27, 2009. Authors will receive acknowledgment of receipt of their submission but no indication of the possible inclusion of their study in the review. REFERENCES Administration for Children and Families. “Guidelines for CBCAP Lead Agencies on Evidence-Based and Evidence Informed Programs and Practices: Learning Along the Way.” Working Paper. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, revised November 13, 2007. Bilukha, Oleg, Robert A. Hahn, Alex Crosby, Mindy T. Fullilove, Akiva Liberman, Eve Moscicki, Susan Snyder, Farris Tuma, Phaedra Corso, Amanda Schofield, and Peter A. Briss. “The Effectiveness of Early Childhood Home Visitation in Preventing Violence: A Systematic Review.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine, vol. 28, no. 2, 2005, pp. 11–39. Daro, Deborah. “Home Visitation: Assessing Progress, Managing Expectations.” Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall Center for Children, 2006. Daro, Deborah, and Anne C. Donnelly. “Charting the Waves of Prevention: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back.” Child Abuse & Neglect, vol. 26, no. 6, 2002, pp. 731–742. DiLauro, Elizabeth. “Reaching Families Where They Live: Supporting Parents and Child Development Through Home Visiting.” Zero to Three, February, 2009. Gomby, Deanna S. “Home Visitation in 2005: Outcomes for Children and Parents.” Invest in Kids Working Paper No. 7. Washington, DC: Committee for Economic Development, July 2005. Johnson, K. “State-based Home Visiting: Strengthening Programs Through State Leadership.” New York: National Center for Children in Poverty, 2009. Available at http://www.nachc.com/client/documents/PCA%20Updates/3172009/homevisit_final_text_862.pdf. Accessed June 4, 2009. Meltzoff, Andrew N., Patricia K. Kuhl, Javier Movellan, and Terrence J. Sejnowski. “Foundations for a New Science of Learning.” Science, vol. 325, no. 5938, 2009, pp. 284–288. Olds, D. L., J. Robinson, L. Pettitt, D. W. Luckey, J. Holmberg, R. K. Ng, K. Isacks, K. Sheff, and C. R. Henderson. “Effects of Home Visits by Paraprofessionals and By Nurses: Age 4 Follow-up Results of a Randomized Trial.” Pediatrics, vol. 114, no. 6, 2004, pp. 1560–1568. Sweet, Monica A., and Mark I. Appelbaum. “Is Home Visiting an Effective Strategy? A Meta-Analytic Review of Home Visiting Programs for Families with Young Children.” Child Development, vol. 75, no. 5, 2004, pp. 1435–1456.