WWC review of this study

First Step Next and homeBase: A Comparative Efficacy Study of Children with Disruptive Behavior [homeBase vs. Business-as-usual]

Frey, Andy J.; Small, Jason W.; Seeley, John R.; Walker, Hill M.; Feil, Edward G.; Lee, Jon; Lissman, Dana Cohen; Crosby, Shantel; Forness, Steven R. (2022). Exceptional Children, v88 n2 p205-222 . Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1323804

  • Randomized Controlled Trial
     examining 
    173
     Students
    , grades
    K-3

Reviewed: February 2024

At least one finding shows promising evidence of effectiveness
At least one statistically significant positive finding
Meets WWC standards without reservations
Academic achievement outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Social Skills Improvement System - Teacher Form - Academic Competency

homeBase vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
170 students

88.44

88.35

No

--
Student Behavior outcomes—Statistically significant positive effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders: Adaptive Behavior Index

homeBase vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
173 students

34.46

30.68

Yes

 
 
18
 

Social Skills Improvement System (SSIS) Rating Scales Problem Behavior: teacher-reported

homeBase vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
169 students

128.47

132.88

No

--

Child Behavior Checklist: Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Problems Scale: Teacher Report

homeBase vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
160 students

71.30

73.58

No

--

Social Skills Improvement System (SSIS) Rating Scales Social Skills: teacher-reported

homeBase vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
169 students

78.26

76.13

No

--

Student-Teacher Relationship Scale (STRS): Child-Teacher Conflict

homeBase vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
173 students

34.62

36.31

No

--

Child Behavior Checklist: Conduct Problems Scale: Teacher Report

homeBase vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
150 students

70.36

71.99

No

--

Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders: Maladaptive Behavior Index

homeBase vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
173 students

34.97

35.95

No

--

Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders: Academic Engaged Time

homeBase vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
163 students

62.68

60.46

No

--

Child Behavior Checklist: Oppositional Defiant Problems Scale: Teacher Report

homeBase vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
169 students

68.22

68.37

No

--


Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.


  • Female: 24%
    Male: 76%
    • B
    • A
    • C
    • D
    • E
    • F
    • G
    • I
    • H
    • J
    • K
    • L
    • P
    • M
    • N
    • O
    • Q
    • R
    • S
    • V
    • U
    • T
    • W
    • X
    • Z
    • Y
    • a
    • h
    • i
    • b
    • d
    • e
    • f
    • c
    • g
    • j
    • k
    • l
    • m
    • n
    • o
    • p
    • q
    • r
    • s
    • t
    • u
    • x
    • w
    • y

    Indiana, Kentucky
  • Race
    Black
    48%
    Other or unknown
    14%
    White
    38%
  • Ethnicity
    Other or unknown    
    100%
  • Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch
    Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL)    
    70%
    No FRPL    
    30%

Setting

The study took place in 100 elementary schools in five school districts in Kentucky and Indiana. The homeBase (HB) intervention was administered in the homes of students over several months. No elements of the HB intervention took place in the child’s school.

Study sample

Across five school years, the researchers randomly assigned 94 students to the First Step Next (FSN) only condition, 96 students to the HB only condition, 94 students to the FSN and HB combined condition, and 95 students to the business-as-usual condition. Students were taught by 379 teachers in 100 schools. Students who were identified as having behavioral challenges were recruited to participate in the study. This review assesses the contrast between students in the HB only and the business-as-usual condition. A total of 173 students from kindergarten to grade 3 were included in this analysis. Among students in the analytic sample, approximately 24% of the students were female, 70% were eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, and 23% had an individualized education program. Forty-eight percent were African American, 38% were White, and the rest had unknown race. The study did not report student ethnicities.

Intervention Group

HomeBase (HB) is a home-visiting intervention that seeks to improve the outcomes of young children by providing home-based support to their caregivers. The intervention consists of three to six 60-minute home visits over several months. During sessions, parents or caregivers are encouraged to align their parenting practices consistent with one or more of the five universal principles of behavioral support: establishing clear expectations, directly teaching expectations, reinforcing the display of expectations, minimizing attention for minor inappropriate behavior, and establishing clear consequences for unacceptable behavior. HB sessions are delivered within a multi-step process for increasing intrinsic motivation to adopt and implement an evidence-based practice with integrity. The four steps are: (1) engage in values discovery (2) assess current practices (3) share performance feedback, and (4) offer extended consultation, education, and support. During each step, HB coaches use motivational interviewing to guide and strengthen the parent/caregiver’s engagement with and commitment to behavioral change.

Comparison Group

Students in the comparison condition received business-as-usual instruction. These students did not receive caregiver support in their homes.

Support for implementation

The HB coaches who participated in this study were University of Louisville employees. In total, 25 coaches participated in HB implementation. Research staff from the Motivational Interviewing Training and Assessment System provided training to all participating HB coaches. This training involved 12 hours of didactic workshops and simulated practice sessions with an experienced implementer. Coaches also participated in weekly supervision meetings led by an experienced implementer with other coaches to troubleshoot any problems during the study.

 

Your export should download shortly as a zip archive.

This download will include data files for study and findings review data and a data dictionary.

Connect With the WWC

loading
back to top