HEAD START RESEARCH and EVALUATION (EHSRE) STUDY 1996-2010 (ICPSR) Patricia Lewis Soc. 680 Fall 2013
FOCUS • Enhancing children’s development • Provide help for low income families • Offer program options based on family needs • Home based option • Center based option • Combination option
Five Major Components • 1. Implementation Study • 2. An Impact Evaluation • 3. Local Research Studies • 4. Policy Studies • 5. Continuous Program Improvement
Purpose • Study Purpose: designed to carry out the recommendation of the Advisory Committee on Services for Families with Infants and Toddlers for a strong research and evaluation component to support continuous improvement within the Early Head Start program and to meet the 1994 reauthorization requirement for a national evaluation of the new infant-toddler program.
Study Design • Rigorous large-scale, random-assignment evaluation and included an implementation study and local research projects. • implementation study-consisted of 3 rounds of site visits • Impact study-followed 3,001 children from enrollment to age 3 • Local research projects-designed to address specific outcomes and program functions that reflected the uniqueness of each Early Head Start program
Sample • All eligible applicants selected were randomly assigned to the program or control group • All cases were targeted for all rounds of data collection • All data collected are in the public-use file
Data Source • Self-enumerated questionnaires • Personal interviews • Direct Observation
Three Phases • 1. Birth to Three Phase (1996-2001) • 2. Pre-Kindergarten Follow-up Phase (2001-2005) • 3. Elementary School Phase (2005-2010)
Analysis Used • One way ANOVA • IV- Type of program • DVs-Satisfaction with child learning, safety, and attention the child got
Satisfaction with child learning in the program is measured at 15 months and 26 months and satisfaction with attention the child got is measured at 26 months and satisfaction with safety is measured at 26 months. Results
Results cont’d • The results found when performing the ANOVA were that satisfaction with child learning at 15 months was significant at .035. P values less than .05 indicate there is a significant difference.
LINKS • http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/3804 • http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/resource
Limitation • Only 12 fathers were interviewed and they were only interviewed when their child was older (24 and 36 months), whereas mothers were interviewed when the child was 14 months and again when their child was 24 and 36 months.
References • Love, John M. 2010. “From Head Start to Early • Head Start and Beyond.” Child Develop- • ment and Social Policy: Knowledge for • Action. • Raikes, Helen. 2010. “Involvement in Early • Head Start home visiting services. Early • Childhood Research Quarterly. 21, (1), 2- • 24. • Administration for Children and Families. Making • a Difference in the Lives of Infants, Toddlers • and their Families. Early Head Start Research and Evalua- • tion Project.