Study Details | Pathways to Work

101031-Study of Child First

Study quality: High

High

Reason for the rating: This study received a high study quality rating because it is a low-attrition randomized controlled trial with no known issues that suggest the findings cannot be attributed to the intervention.

Intervention: Child First

Population and employment barriers:

Educational attainment (At least a high school diploma or equivalent), Parenting (Parents)

Services provided:

Case management, Mental health services

Setting: Tested in multiple settings

Study design

Design:

Randomized controlled trial

Study group formation:

Site supervisors responsible for screening new applicants randomized eligible families into either the Child First intervention group or the intervention group. The RCT was designed such that new applicants had a 60% chance of receiving Child First.

Time period of study:

The follow-up survey was administered between August 2020 and March 2021.

Primary outcome domains examined:

Decrease short-term benefit receipt, Increase short-term employment

Other outcome domains examined:

The study also examines impacts on other measures of assistance or support, food insecurity, housing stability, caregiver psychological well-being, and child behavior.

Study funded by:

Arnold Ventures and The Duke Endowment

Results

View table help Need more context or definitions for the table below? View the table help to get insight into terms, measures, and definitions.

Scroll to the right to view the rest of the table columns

Outcome domain	Measure	Timing	Study quality by finding	Comparison group mean	Intervention group mean	Impact	Units	Sample size
Increase short-term employment	Currently employed	12-month followup survey	High	49.84	51.64	1.80	percentage points	182
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received any public assistance benefits, follow-up period	12-month followup survey	High	55.45	59.06	3.61	percentage points	182
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received food stamps/SNAP, follow-up period	12-month followup survey	High	59.13	53.50	-5.63	percentage points	182
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received UI payments, follow-up period	12-month followup survey	High	21.60	22.76	1.16	percentage points	182

Short-term outcomes are those measured 18 months or fewer after participants are first offered services. Long-term outcomes are those measured between 18 months and 5 years after participants are first offered services. Very long-term outcomes are those measured 5 years or more after participants are first offered services.

Findings quality key:

High
Moderate

Study quality terms?

The findings quality describe our confidence that a given study’s finding is because of the intervention. We do not display findings that rate low.

Findings key:

A moderate-to-large favorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A moderate-to-large favorable finding that might to be due to chance
A small favorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A small favorable finding that might be due to chance
A favorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
A favorable finding that might be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
A moderate-to-large unfavorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A moderate-to-large unfavorable finding that might to be due to chance
A small unfavorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A small unfavorable finding that might be due to chance
An unfavorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
An unfavorable finding that might be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
A finding that is unlikely to be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size or direction
A finding of no effect that might be due to chance

Favorable findings are impacts in a direction that is socially desirable. Statistical significance indicates the likelihood that a study finding is due to the intervention, rather than due to chance. Findings are described as moderate-to-large if the intervention produced a sufficiently large change in the outcome. An impact receives this designation if the standardized effect size is equal to or greater than 0.25 or equal to or less than -0.25.

Sample characteristics

The study sample was composed of 182 families with the average age of the primary caregiver being about 35 years old. Approximately 75% of participating households were reported as low-income and the majority had had current or previous involvement in the child welfare system. Nearly all caregivers reported seeking assistance with behavioral issues from their children.

Age

Mean age

35 years

Sex

Female

35%

Participant race and ethnicity

Black or African American	20%
White, not Hispanic	44%
Hispanic or Latino of any race	31%
Another race	4%

The race and ethnicity categories may sum to more than 100 percent if the authors reported race and ethnicity separately; in these cases, we report the category White, rather than White, not Hispanic.

Family status

Parents	100%
Single parents	39%

Participant employment and public benefit status

Were employed	66%
Were unemployed	36%

Participant education

Had a high school diploma or GED	88%
Did not have a high school diploma or GED	12%

Specific employment barriers

Were experiencing homelessness

18%

Intervention implementation

Implementing organization:

Child First

Program history:

The Child First program has been in existence since at least 2011.

Intervention services:

Families in the treatment group received a hybrid version of the typical Child First program. The intervention consisted of care coordination, connecting families to available and relevant resources, and a trauma-informed intervention aimed at promoting executive functioning and healthy family relationships delivered by a trained clinician. Families received twice weekly touchpoints, either in-person or virtually, with a clinician and a care coordinator during the first month of enrollment followed by weekly visits for the remainder of the program.

Mandatory services:

None

Comparison services:

Control group families were placed on an 18-month embargo making them ineligible to receive Child First services. Instead, they received a list of other available resources in their community.

Service receipt duration:

The treatment group families received Child First for an average duration of just under 8 months.

Intervention funding:

Families First Prevention Services Act

Study publications

Xia, Samantha, Mervett Hefyan, Meghan McCormick, Maya Goldberg, Emily Swinth, and Sharon Huang (2026). Child First Home Visiting Impacts During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial, Journal of Family Psychology 40(1): 37-48. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0001393

View the glossary for more information about these and other terms used on this page.

The Pathways Clearinghouse refers to interventions by the names used in study reports or manuscripts. Some intervention names may use language that is not consistent with our style guide, preferences, or the terminology we use to describe populations.