IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/cysrev/v155y2023ics0190740923003572.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Co-designing a conceptual framework of home visiting implementation quality

Author

Listed:
  • Goldberg, Jessica L.
  • Sparr, Mariel
  • Rosinsky, Kristina
  • Lloyd, Chrishana M.
  • Till, Lance
  • Harris, Phoebe
  • Crowne, Sarah
  • Fortune, Bryn
  • Higgins, Carrie

Abstract

Early childhood home visiting is a two-generation approach to promote positive health and well-being outcomes among people who are pregnant and families with infants and young children. A popular family support strategy for the past several decades, home visiting expanded exponentially in the United States when the federal Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program (MIECHV) was authorized in 2010 through a provision within the Affordable Care Act. MIECHV currently funds evidence-based home visiting services in underserved and historically marginalized communities in all 50 states, 22 tribes, the District of Columbia, and five U.S. territories. It is widely accepted that achieving intended child and family outcomes through home visiting services requires “high-quality” program implementation, but the field lacks a standard definition or empirical evidence for what “quality” means in the context of home visiting. With the rapid expansion of home visiting that has accompanied MIECHV, there is increased interest from the field in having a shared understanding of home visiting implementation quality that is applicable across models and accounts for dimensions of quality across the entirety of the home visiting implementation system. This paper describes the process used to develop a conceptual framework to understand home visiting quality. We engaged MIECHV awardees and other experts from the fields of home visiting, early childhood, implementation science, and health equity in a co-design process that involved initial brainstorming, a series of iterative framework drafts, and finalization of the model. The resulting framework captures the multiple levels (i.e., the contexts, agencies, entities, and individuals) that are part of the home visiting system and the theorized key aspects of quality that are applicable across the levels of the systems. We discuss potential uses of the conceptual framework, as well as lessons learned from the co-design process.

Suggested Citation

  • Goldberg, Jessica L. & Sparr, Mariel & Rosinsky, Kristina & Lloyd, Chrishana M. & Till, Lance & Harris, Phoebe & Crowne, Sarah & Fortune, Bryn & Higgins, Carrie, 2023. "Co-designing a conceptual framework of home visiting implementation quality," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:155:y:2023:i:c:s0190740923003572
    DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2023.107161
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0190740923003572
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.childyouth.2023.107161?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Deborah Daro & Kimberly Boller & Bonnie Hart, 2014. "Implementation Fidelity in Early Childhood Home Visiting: Successes Meeting Staffing Standards, Challenges Hitting Dosage and Duration Targets," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 2e41f5fdbd6e4187a9737712d, Mathematica Policy Research.
    2. Goldberg, Jessica & Bumgarner, Erin & Jacobs, Francine, 2016. "Measuring program- and individual-level fidelity in a home visiting program for adolescent parents," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 163-173.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Helen Lee & Sarah Shea Crowne & Melanie Estarziau & Keith Kranker & Charles Michalopoulos & Anne Warren & Tod Mijanovich & Jill H. Filene & Anne Duggan & Virginia Knox, "undated". "The Effects of Home Visiting on Prenatal Health, Birth Outcomes, and Health Care Use in the First Year of Life: Final Implementation and Impact Findings from the Mother and Infant Home Visiting Progra," Mathematica Policy Research Reports a9626a8d90bf4f01811d0c9d7, Mathematica Policy Research.
    2. Teasdale, Rebecca M. & Strasser, Mikayla & Moore, Ceily & Graham, Kara E., 2023. "Evaluative criteria in practice: Findings from an analysis of evaluations published in Evaluation and Program Planning," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    3. Goldberg, Jessica & Bumgarner, Erin & Jacobs, Francine, 2016. "Measuring program- and individual-level fidelity in a home visiting program for adolescent parents," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 163-173.
    4. Mersky, Joshua P. & Janczewski, Colleen E. & Plummer Lee, ChienTi & Yasin, Tajammal, 2022. "Impact of home visiting programs on parenting stress in low-income women: Findings from a community-based trial at an urban health department," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    5. McMillin, Stephen Edward & Carbone, Jason T., 2020. "A skillset and a stance: Program planning for cultural competence and cultural humility in home visitation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    6. Debra Strong & Russell Cole & Angela D’Angelo & Juliette Henke & Yange Xue, "undated". "RPG Child and Family Outcomes: Fifth Annual Report to Congress," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 7bfa5cccd7a84c6ba26691d9b, Mathematica Policy Research.
    7. Bujold, M. & El Sherif, R. & Bush, P.L. & Johnson-Lafleur, J. & Doray, G. & Pluye, P., 2018. "Ecological content validation of the Information Assessment Method for parents (IAM-parent): A mixed methods study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 79-88.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:155:y:2023:i:c:s0190740923003572. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.