Home Visiting Programs: Supporting Relationships and Healthy Development
You are here
Tamika, an experienced home visitor, observes Jennifer and her 11-month-old son Jason playing with a set of nesting cups. Jennifer encourages Jason to put a small red cup inside a larger blue one. Tamika explains that Jason is learning to hold and manipulate objects while playing with the cups, as well as learning colors, shapes, and prepositions. Tamika reinforces this notion, saying, “Yes, just keep explaining in and out,” as Jennifer points to the red cup and tells Jason, “Put this one in the bigger cup.” Then, Tamika notices some toy farm animals nearby and suggests Jennifer add them to their play. Jennifer says, “Jason, this dog wants to be in the cup. Can you put him in there?” After a few tries, Jason drops the dog into the cup and Jennifer claps enthusiastically, saying, “You did it, Jason! You put the dog in the cup!” Tamika watches attentively for a few minutes and notes, “You are doing a great job repeating in and out to help Jason learn—and keeping him engaged!”
Babies are born eager to learn. Children grow, develop, and learn at a tremendous rate during their early years, and families play a critical role in helping their children prepare for success in school and in life (Sroufe, Coffino, & Carlson 2010). Families across the country are participating in home visiting (also known as family support) programs just like Jason’s family. This article will describe home visiting programs and how they fit into the communities they serve.
What is the purpose of home visiting programs?
Home visiting programs provide family-focused interventions for pregnant women, infants, toddlers, and preschoolers in the family’s home. The aim of these programs is to enhance parents’ capacity to head their households and support their children’s development while keeping them safe (HRSA 2018). Home visiting services have been supporting families facing challenges for more than 100 years (Weiss 1993). Currently, more than two million children and their families in the United States receive home visiting services (Lanier, Maguire-Jack, & Welch 2015).
Activities during visits are designed to promote children’s healthy growth and development by showing parents how to help their children learn. Home visitors also facilitate parental health and self-sufficiency by connecting families to community resources (Pew Charitable Trusts 2015). Home visiting programs embrace a family-centered, culturally responsive philosophy built on research showing that loving, responsive, parent–child interactions occurring in the context of daily routines provide optimal learning opportunities (Shonkoff 2017).
Young children are learning all the time, and babies’ interactions with their primary caregivers (generally parents but also grandparents, other family members, and fictive kin) influence attachment, emotional regulation, communication, physical development, and ability to engage in learning (Sroufe, Coffino, & Carlson 2010). Positive parent–child relationships form the foundation for children’s future relationships and affect children’s emotional well-being, coping skills, and problem-solving abilities (Lerner et al. 2002; Zeman et al. 2006). Supporting families, especially those who are facing challenges due to poverty, disabilities, or compromised health, can enhance children’s development dramatically.
The benefits of home visiting programs
Home visitors collaborate with families to facilitate healthy and enjoyable parent–child interactions. Home visitors help families identify goals, explore ways to reach those goals, and address any issues they face along the way (HRSA 2018). Let’s return to Tamika’s visit.
Jennifer mentions that Jason hasn’t been willing to eat solid foods, and she has questions about what to feed him. Tamika notices a banana on the kitchen counter and suggests that Jason might try eating it. Jennifer likes that idea, so she mashes up part of the banana and begins feeding Jason with a spoon. At first Jason doesn’t want to eat it, but he gradually becomes interested. Tamika suggests that Jason might enjoy eating some banana and practicing his fine motor skills at the same time. She helps Jennifer cut the banana into small pieces and puts them on the high chair tray. Jason picks up a piece, eats it, and grins. Both Jennifer and Tamika are very excited. Tamika says, “A first attempt may fail, but if you keep trying, you can help Jason reach his goals.”
Tamika supports Jennifer’s engagement with Jason by drawing on—and sharing—her knowledge of child development to facilitate positive parent–child interactions (McCollum & Yates 1994; Hughes & Peterson 2008). Importantly, Tamika also recognizes and builds on Jennifer’s competence, offering suggestions that enhance Jennifer’s ability to promote Jason’s development.
Home visiting programs have facilitated an array of positive child and parent outcomes across families with diverse characteristics, in various communities, and across different areas of development and parenting (Sweet & Appelbaum 2004; Avellar & Supplee 2013). Programs have increased family self-sufficiency, reduced health care costs for children and families, and reduced the need for remedial education services (Pew Charitable Trusts 2015). Let’s look at a few examples: Early Head Start, the Nurse Family Partnership, and Healthy Families America.
In Early Head Start’s home-based option, home visitors support parents during weekly sessions, much like Tamika supports Jennifer. In addition, children, families, and visitors come together for monthly group sessions. Children participating in home-based Early Head Start programs showed stronger vocabulary development at age 2 and better engagement with their parents during play at age 3 when compared with community peers not enrolled in the program. In addition, parents provided more stimulating home environments and reported less parenting stress and greater involvement in education and training activities than their community peers (ACF 2006). Positive impacts of Early Head Start’s home visiting program persisted; at kindergarten entry, children were more likely to display positive approaches to learning, less likely to exhibit behavior problems, and more likely to have attended a formal preschool setting (2006).
In the Nurse Family Partnership model, registered nurses provide intensive prenatal and postnatal home visitation to first-time mothers with low incomes (Olds 2006). The program’s main goals are to improve (1) women’s prenatal and pregnancy outcomes; (2) children’s health and development through increased parental caregiving skills and sensitivity; and (3) parents’ abilities to meet their goals by helping parents plan future pregnancies, meet their education goals (such as earning a high school diploma or college degree), and find sustainable employment (2006). The Nurse Family Partnership has improved mothers’ abilities to provide responsive and competent care for their children while increasing the amount of time between pregnancies (Miller 2015). As compared with community peers, participants have reduced rates of intimate partner violence and decreased reliance on government assistance programs (e.g., Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, Medicaid, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families [2015]). In addition, participants’ children have improved early language development, fewer childhood injuries, and reduced rates of maltreatment, youth crime, and substance abuse (2015).
The Healthy Families America model seeks to improve parenting skills, reduce child maltreatment, support children’s social and emotional health, and promote school readiness (Daro & Harding 1999). While this program has a core set of service options and quality standards, it emphasizes flexibility. The services offered are determined by families’ and communities’ unique needs (1999). Healthy Families America participants, as compared to nonparticipant community peers with similar characteristics, have decreased rates of low-birth-weight babies, reductions in child maltreatment, increased positive parenting behaviors, improved birth outcomes, improved child development, and reduced child behavior problems at age 2 (Caldera et al. 2007; Avellar & Supplee 2013).
To learn more about home visiting programs and their evidence of effectiveness, visit http://homvee.acf.hhs.gov. The key takeaway is that when they are carefully designed and well implemented, home visiting programs greatly improve parent–child interactions, resulting in a cascade of long-term benefits.
Home visiting programs: The community context
To address families’ diverse needs, it is best for home visiting programs to collaborate with other programs serving families, including child care, school-based preschools, and social service and health programs (HRSA 2018). Jennifer and Jason, for example, participate in a home visiting program and receive services from the Women, Infant, and Children supplemental nutrition program. Jennifer also attends the local community college—she enrolled soon after Tamika shared information with her about the college’s low-cost child care for students. Let’s meet two more families to explore additional opportunities for programs to coordinate.
Elizabeth, who runs a small child care and education center in her home, has cared for 12-month-old Madison for the past seven months. Elizabeth has observed that while Madison can crawl, she is having trouble pulling to stand, even with assistance; holding small objects is also difficult for her, and Madison does not try to feed herself. Elizabeth shares her concerns with Madison’s parents, Cheri and Alonzo. Together, they explore options, and decide to enroll in an Early Head Start home visiting program.
Soon, Cheri is working with Rhonda, the home visitor, to explore ways to arrange Madison’s daily activities to provide maximum practice with her motor skills. Cheri, Elizabeth, and Rhonda communicate frequently. Often, Rhonda and Cheri meet at Elizabeth’s home to review progress and try out new ideas. For example, they have been helping Madison use an adapted spoon during mealtimes and placing some toys out of Madison’s reach to encourage her to practice standing. Rhonda is also working with Cheri to determine whether Part C early intervention (special education) services might be needed.
Leo, who is 4 years old, and his family began receiving home visiting services when Leo was 6 months of age. When Ashley, his home visitor, met the family, Leo’s mom, Isabel, had lost her job and his dad, Johnny, had dropped out of community college. Ashley collaborated with Leo’s parents to support his development. She coached Isabel as she used toys and household objects to play with Leo. Ashley also warmly invited Johnny to join in the activities whenever he was present. In addition, Ashley shared information about job opportunities and community resources with Isabel and Johnny. With Ashley’s encouragement, Isabel soon found a job at a local pharmacy, and Johnny decided to continue his community college studies. When Leo turned 4, Ashley suggested that enrolling Leo in preschool would help him get ready for school and be fun for him, too. Isabel and Johnny liked the idea but worried it would be a challenge financially. Ashley referred them to a local Head Start program and assisted Isabel and Johnny throughout the application process. Today, Leo is no longer receiving home visiting services. He loves his preschool classroom and his new friends. Isabel and Johnny, pleased with Leo’s progress, are feeling less stress; they are also optimistic about the opportunities Johnny will have once he receives his associate’s degree.
Home visiting programs offer distinct services; they differ from center-based programs by delivering services and supports in the family’s home, enabling participation by families who might otherwise have difficulty accessing resources. Additional benefits include opportunities to facilitate and coach parenting and life skills in the home environment, build supportive relationships among the provider and family members, and tailor services to meet each family’s specific needs, provided by the one-to-one interaction unique to the home visiting model (Gomby 2005).
High-quality home visiting programs individualize services, strengthen families, and connect them with community resources.
High-quality home visiting programs individualize services, strengthen families, and connect them with a variety of community resources. Developing and implementing a new home visiting program requires extensive planning—especially to ensure that the program is well integrated with existing services for families and is meeting local needs. Program model developers use a variety of data to identify community strengths, needs, and service gaps to maximize available resources. Ongoing analysis of both program components and system-level implementation is critical to sustaining high-quality home visiting programs. See “Key Components of High-Quality Home Visiting Programs” for the most critical details, including community support, well-trained staff members, and ongoing evaluation (Johnson 2009).
Conclusion
The inherent flexibility of home-based programs makes them ideally suited to address each family’s individual needs in the context of their most comfortable setting. But fewer than 20 percent of families living below the federal poverty line are being served (Lanier, McGuire-Jack, & Welch 2015). Advocacy for universal home visiting programs has been growing over the past two decades (Pew Charitable Trusts 2015) as evidence of effectiveness continues to build (Sama-Miller et al. 2017). Truly supporting all families, however, will require communities to develop a preventive system of care that expands access to evidence-based programs and provides a diverse array of programs. Such a system may be the only way to optimize the strengths and address the specific needs of each family. An increase in both public and professional awareness of the service options in a community allows for the creation of a continuum of early childhood services that can connect families to home visiting programs (Johnson 2009) and to related services. The goal of all home visiting programs is to build a partnership with each family and tailor services to the family’s unique needs to enhance child health and development and increase family self-sufficiency. Home visiting programs are an investment in the future of each child and family, encouraging nurturing relationships and enriching experiences that allow each family to flourish.
Key Components of High-Quality Home Visiting Programs
- A community that understands the program and supports its development
- Program staff that are well trained and supported through high-quality supervision
- Strong administrative support
- Ongoing evaluation of program implementation so that quality issues can be addressed in a timely manner
- An environment in which the need for the program is clearly understood and local services are coordinated across programs and providers to maximize use of resources
- A spirit of collaboration with other early childhood programs
- Strong local leadership to nurture the development of the services
References
ACF (Administration for Children and Families). 2006. “Early Head Start Home-Based Services.” Research to Practice, Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Project. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families. www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/homebase_services.pdf.
Avellar, S.A., & L.H. Supplee. 2013. “Effectiveness of Home Visiting in Improving Child Health and Reducing Child Maltreatment.” Supplement. Pediatrics 132 (no. S2): S90–S99. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/132/Supplement_....
Caldera, D., L. Burrell, K. Rodriguez, S.S. Crowne, C. Rohde, & A. Duggan. 2007. “Impact of a Statewide Home Visiting Program on Parenting and on Child Health and Development.” Child Abuse & Neglect 31 (8): 829–52.
Daro, D.A., & K.A. Harding. 1999. “Healthy Families America: Using Research to Enhance Practice.” The Future of Children
9 (1): 152–76.
Gomby, D.S. 2005. “Home Visitation in 2005: Outcomes for Children and Parents.” Invest in Kids Working Paper 7. Arlington, VA: Committee for Economic Development. http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lc/committees/study/2008/SFAM08/files/GombyHV....
HRSA (Health Resources and Services Administration). 2018. “Home Visiting.” HRSA, Maternal and Child Health. https://mchb.hrsa.gov/maternal-child-health-initiatives/home-visiting-ov....
Hughes, K., & C.A. Peterson. 2008. “Conducting Home Visits with an Explicit Theory of Change.” In Early Intervention for Infants and Toddlers and Their Families: Practices and Outcomes, eds. C. Peterson, L. Fox, & P.M. Blasco, 47–59, Young Exceptional Children Monograph Series No. 10. Missoula, MT: Division for Early Childhood.
Johnson, K. 2009. State-Based Home Visiting: Strengthening Programs through State Leadership. New York: National Center for Children in Poverty. www.nccp.org/publications/pdf/text_862.pdf.
Lanier, P., K. Maguire-Jack, & H. Welch. 2015. “A Nationally Representative Study of Early Childhood Home Visiting Service Use in the United States.” Maternal and Child Health 19 (10): 2147–58.
Lerner, R.M., F. Rothbaum, S. Bouloso, & D.R. Castellino. 2002. “Developmental Systems Perspective on Parenting”. In Handbook of Parenting, Volume 2: Biology and Ecology of Parenting, 2nd ed., ed. M.H. Bornstein, 315–344. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
McCollum, J.A., & T.J. Yates. 1994. “Dyad as Focus, Triad as Means: A Family-Centered Approach to Supporting Parent–Child Interactions.” Infants and Young Children 6 (4): 54–63.
Miller, T.R. 2015. “Projected Outcomes of Nurse–Family Partnership Home Visitation during 1996–2013, USA.” Prevention Science 16 (6): 765–77.
Olds, D.L. 2006. “The Nurse–Family Partnership: An Evidence-Based Preventive Intervention.” Infant Mental Health Journal 27 (1): 5–25.
Pew Charitable Trusts. 2015. “Home Visiting Family Support Programs: Benefits of the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program.” Fact sheet. Home Visiting Project. www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/fact-sheets/2014/02/03/home-v....
Sama-Miller, E., L. Akers, A. Mraz-Esposito, M. Zukiewicz, S. Avelar, D. Paulsell, & P. Del Grosso. 2017. “Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness Review: Executive Summary”. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, US Department of Health and Human Services. https://homvee.acf.hhs.gov/homvee_executive_summary_august_2017_final_50....
Shonkoff, J.P. 2017. “Breakthrough Impacts: What Science Tells Us About Supporting Early Childhood Development.” Young Children 72 (2): 8–16.
Sroufe, L.A., B. Coffino, & E.A. Carlson. 2010. “Conceptualizing the Role of Early Experience: Lessons from the Minnesota Longitudinal Study.” Developmental Review 30 (1): 36–51.
Sweet, M.A., & M.I. Appelbaum. 2004. “Is Home Visiting an Effective Strategy? A Meta-Analytic Review of Home Visiting Programs for Families with Young Children.” Child Development 75 (5): 1435–56.
Weiss, H.B. 1993. “Home Visits: Necessary but Not Sufficient.” The Future of Children 3 (3): 113–28.
Zeman, J., M. Cassano, C. Perry-Parrish, & S. Stegall. 2006. “Emotion Regulation in Children and Adolescents.” Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics 27 (2): 155–68.
Photographs: © Getty Images
Carla A. Peterson, PhD, is the Nancy Rygg Armbrust Professor of Early Childhood Development and Education in the Department of Human Development at Iowa State University, in Ames, Iowa. She has collaborated on numerous statewide and national studies of home visiting programs.
Leslie J. Dooley, MS, IBCLC, is project coordinator for the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) evaluation at Iowa State University. She collaborated on a statewide evaluation of home visiting programs using observational coding measures to examine home visit quality, content, and efficacy.
Liuran Fan, PhD, is a research associate in the Department of Human Development and Family Studies at Iowa State University. She has worked on the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) evaluation at Iowa State University.