Using home visits for multiple purposes: The comprehensive child development program

Future of Children

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 134-151

  St Pierre, Robert G ^a   Layzer, Jean I ^a  

^a ABT ASSOCIATES   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CHILD; CHILD DEVELOPMENT; CHILD PARENT RELATION; EDUCATION; EDUCATION PROGRAM; FAMILY; HEALTH PROGRAM; HEALTH SERVICE; HUMAN; SOCIAL WORK;

EID: 0032708161     PISSN: 10548289     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/1602725     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. For a discussion of a broader range of two-generation programs, see St.Pierre, R.G., Layzer, J.I., and Barnes, H.V. Two-generation programs: Design, cost, and short-term effectiveness. The Future of Children (Winter 1995) 5,3:76-93.
2. Administration on Children, Youth and Families. Comprehensive Child Development Program: A national family support demonstration. Interim report to Congress. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1994. CCDP had an annual budget of $25 million from Fiscal Years (FY) 1988 to 1991, $44.4 million in FY 1992, $46.8 million in FY 1993, and $50 million in FY 1994.
3. The 24 Cohort 1 CCDP sites were Albuquerque, NM; Baltimore, MD; Boston, MA; Brattleboro, VT; Brooklyn, NY; Denver, CO; Fort Totten, ND; Fort Worth, TX; Glenwood City, WI; Grand Rapids, MI; Kansas City, KS; Las Cruces, NM; Lexington, KY; Little Rock, AR; Logan, UT; Marshalltown, IA; Miami, FL; Nashville, TN; Phoenix, AZ; Pittsburgh, PA; San Antonio, TX; Seattle, WA; Venice, CA; and Washington, DC. Ten additional Cohort 2 CCDP grantees were funded in FY 1992 and FY 1993. Although the Cohort 2 sites were not included in the evaluation discussed in this article, they are participating in an evaluation, which is due to be completed in September 1999.
4. See note no. 2, Administration on Children, Youth and Families, pp. 2.10 and 2.15. ACYF reports that after the first year of service delivery, all CCDP projects began to use a combination of paraprofessionals and professional case managers. This change was made because of the tensions that developed "between the beliefs and practices of [the paraprofessional staff] and the requirements of specialized training for dealing with multiproblem families." Consequently, the definition of "professional" included "the ability to develop caring relationships and an interest in continuing to learn; an interest in moving families out of the welfare system (as opposed to 'working the welfare system'); experience working with families in poverty and domestic violence situations; the ability to view problems as a challenge; a background in chemical dependency; cultural sensitivity; and the ability not to use personal values to judge a family's situation."
5. Administration on Children, Youth and Families. Comprehensive Child Development Program: A national family support demonstration. First annual report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, December 1991.
6. St.Pierre, R.G., Layzer, J.I., Goodson, B.D., and Bernstein, L.S. National impact evaluation of the Comprehensive Child Development Program: Final report. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates, June 1997.
7. CSR, Inc. Process evaluation of the Comprehensive Child Development Program. Washington, DC: CSR, Inc., 1997.
8. Fort Totten, ND, and Washington, DC, were excluded from the evaluation because of an inability to follow study protocols for random assignment and maintenance of records; Miami, FL, was excluded because the site received funding a year later than the other sites in the evaluation.
9. See note no. 2, Administration on Children, Youth and Families, p. 9.11. ACYF reports that CCDP grantees used replacement families to replace program families that became inactive (through dropping out, moving, and so forth) to maintain their service levels. In general, replacement families were not used in the impact evaluation.
10. CCDP children did score significantly higher than control children on the Developmental Checklist. However, the difference on this untested measure of social and emotional development was so small (0.4 points, or about one-fifteenth of a standard deviation) that it was extremely unlikely to produce any change in children's lives. This is an example in which the very large sample size of the evaluation permitted detection of a statistically significant effect that was educationally meaningless.
11. See note no. 7, CSR, Inc., p. 5.5, which reports that external services were those provided to CCDP participants at no cost to the CCDP program - for example, medical and health services donated by private providers. When the value of these donated services was included, the total cost of CCDP averaged $15,768 per family per year in 1994 dollars, or about $47,000 for each family in the evaluation, given an average length of participation of 3.3 years.
12. Administration on Children, Youth and Families. Project Head Start statistical fact sheet. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, February 1995.
13. University of Alabama at Birmingham, Civitan International Research Center. Personal communication with Dr. Craig T. Ramey, director, June 1994.
14. St.Pierre, R.G., Swartz, J., Gamse, B., et al. National evaluation of the Even Start Family Literacy Program: Final report. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates, January 1995.
15. Olds, D., Henderson, C., Phelps, C., et al. Effect of prenatal and infancy nurse home visitation on government spending. Medical Care (1993) 31:155-74.
16. Larner, M., Halpern, R., and Harkavy, O. Fair Start for children: Lessons learned from seven demonstration projects. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1992.
17. Quint, J.C., Polit, D.F., Bos, H., and Cave, G. New Chance: Interim findings on a comprehensive program for disadvantaged young mothers and their children. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation, 1994.
18. Schweinhart, L.J., Barnes, H.V., and Weikart, D.P. Significant benefits: The High/Scope Perry Preschool study through age 27. Monograph 10. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Educational Research Foundation, 1993.
19. Yoshikawa, H. Long-term effects of early childhood programs on social outcomes and delinquency. The Future of Children (Winter 1995) 5,3:51-75.
20. Barnett, W.S. Long-term effects of early childhood programs on cognitive and school outcomes. The Future of Children (Winter 1995) 5,3:25-50.
21. St.Pierre, R., Goodson, B., Layzer, J., and Bernstein, L. National evaluation of the Comprehensive Child Development Program: Interim report. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates, 1994. About two years into the program, more CCDP mothers than control group mothers participated in parenting classes (34% versus 11%), academic classes (38% versus 26%), and vocational classes (18% versus 13%); and more worked toward general educational development (GED) certificates (12% versus 8%), associate's degrees (7% versus 3%), or bachelor's degrees (6% versus 3%). CCDP children were more likely than control group children to participate in work-related child care (66% versus 53%), to use formal child care (36% versus 16%), and to use on-work-related child care (25% versus 13%). In addition, equal percentages of CCDP and control group families visited doctors for checkups, received acute medical care, and received dental services.
22. Bickman, L. A continuum of care: More is not always better. American Psychologist (July 1996) 51:689-701.
23. Burns, B., Farmer, E., Angold, A., et al. A randomized trial of case management for youths with serious emotional disturbance. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, in press.
24. Cauce, A., Morgan, C., Wagner, M., and Moore, E. Effectiveness of intensive case management for homeless adolescents after nine months. Paper presented at the eighth annual research conference "A System of Care for Children's Mental Health: Expanding the Research Base." Tampa, FL, February 1995.
25. Huz, S., Evans, M., Morrissey, J., and Burns, B. Outcomes from research on case management with serious emotional disturbances. Paper presented at the eighth annual research conference "A System of Care for Children's Mental Health: Expanding the Research Base." Tampa, FL, February 1995.
26. Ramey, S.L., and Ramey, C.T. Early educational intervention with disadvantaged children -To what effect? Applied and Preventive Psychology (1992) 1:131-40.
27. Wasik, B., Ramey, C., Bryant, D., and Sparling, J. A longitudinal study of two early intervention strategies: Project CARE. Child Development (1990) 61:1682-96.
28. Clarke-Stewart, A. Parents' effects on children's development: A decade of progress? Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology (1988) 9:41-84.
29. McNaughton, D. Measuring parent satisfaction with early childhood intervention programs: Current practice, problems and future perspectives. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education (1994) 14:26-28.
30. St.Pierre, R.G., and Layzer, J.I. Improving the life chances of children in poverty: Assumptions and what we have learned. Social Policy Report: Society for Research on Child Development (1998) 12:4.