Outcomes from a Randomized Controlled Trial of the Relief Nursery Program
- 12 Downloads
An independent, randomized controlled trial of the community-developed, multiple-component Relief Nursery prevention program was conducted with families with young children considered “at risk” for child abuse and neglect. This established program, currently operating at multiple sites in the state of Oregon, comprises an integrated package of prevention services to children and families, including early childhood education, home visiting, and parent education and support, as well as other interventions tailored to the needs of each particular family. Families who contacted the Relief Nursery for the first time were randomly assigned to one of two conditions, the Full Program condition, whose members had access to all services available from the Relief Nursery, or the Respite Care condition, whose members had access only to respite care and referrals to services provided by other community agencies. A primary caregiver in each family was interviewed prior to intervention and then every 6 months across a period of 2 years. Standardized measures were collected on a variety of risk and protective factors related to child abuse and neglect. Analyses were conducted at the end of the study period. Differences were found between the conditions in terms of perceived helpfulness and satisfaction with services and in terms of social support, in each case favoring the Full Program condition. Implications of the findings for future studies of multicomponent child abuse prevention programs with similar characteristics to the Relief Nursery are discussed.
KeywordsCrisis nursery Early childhood education Child abuse and neglect Parenting Home visiting Randomized controlled trial
We are grateful to each of the families who participated in this study, to the staff members of the Relief Nursery of Eugene–Springfield who delivered services to study families and children, and to each of the organizational members of the Oregon Association of Relief Nurseries, whose staff members provided extensive input into the design of the study. Special thanks to Kelly Sutherland, Lory Britain, Irene Alltucker, Sharri da Silva, Jean Phelps, Amy Ripley, Becky Lamoureux, Walt Letkiewicz, Kevin Alltucker, Leslie Finlay, Julia Richards, Diana Strand, Sally Schwader, Melanie Hyers, Julie Stubbs, Beth Green, and Ben de Haan for their contributions to this work.
This study was funded by the Office of Child Abuse and Neglect, Children’s Bureau, Administration for Children and Families, Administration on Children, Youth, and Families, Grant No. 90CA1781. The services to families were funded through a variety of public and private sources, including the state of Oregon and the Meyer Memorial Trust.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
This research was conducted with the approval of the Oregon Social Learning Center Institutional Review Board. All procedures performed in studies involving human subjects were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent or assent was obtained from all individual study participants.
- Abidin, R. R. (1995). Parenting Stress Index, Third Edition: Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.Google Scholar
- Achenbach, T. M. (1992). Revised child behavior checklist. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont.Google Scholar
- Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Burrus, S. W. M., Green, B. L., & Lambarth, C. H. (2009). Evaluation of Oregon’s Relief Nursery Program: July 1, 2007–June 30, 2008. Portland, OR: NPC Research.Google Scholar
- Cicchetti, D., & Toth, S. L. (2015). Child maltreatment. In M. E. Lamb & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science: Socioemotional processes (pp. 513–563). Hoboken, NJ, US: John Wiley & Sons Inc.Google Scholar
- Dunst, C. J., Trivette, C. M., & Deal, A. G. (1988). Enabling and empowering families: Principles and guidelines for practice. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.Google Scholar
- Eddy, J. M., Reid, J. B., & Fetrow, R. A. (2000). An elementary-school based prevention program targeting modifiable antecedents of youth delinquency and violence: Linking the Interests of Families and Teachers (LIFT). Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8(3), 165–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Eddy, J. M., Finlay, L., Alltucker, K., & Shortt, J. W. (2018). The relief nursery program: A multimodal, tailored prevention intervention targeted child abuse and neglect. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
- Gelles, R. J., & Perlman, S. (2012). Estimated annual cost of child abuse and neglect. Chicago IL: Prevent Child Abuse America Available from https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=261759. Accessed 15 April 2018.Google Scholar
- Gibaud-Wallston, J., & Wandersman, L. P. (1978, August). Development and utility of the parenting sense of competence scale. Toronto: Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
- Green, B. L., & Mitchell, L. (2012). Evaluation of the Oregon Relief Nurseries. Center for Improvement of Child and Family Services. Portland, OR: Portland State University.Google Scholar
- Gustafsson, H. C., Barnett, M. A., Towe-Goodman, N. R., Mills-Koonce, W. R., Cox, M. J., & the Family Life Project Key Investigators. (2014). Family violence and children’s behavior problems: Independent contributions of intimate partner and child-directed physical aggression. Journal of Family Violence, 29, 773–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Martinez, C. R., Jr., McClure, H. L., & Eddy, J. M. (2008). Latino immigrant children and families: Demographics, challenges, and promise. In R. Bussel (Ed.), Understanding the immigrant experience in Oregon: Research, analysis, and recommendations from University of Oregon Scholars (pp. 57–67). Eugene, OR: Creative Publishing.Google Scholar
- Milner, J. (1986). The Child Abuse Potential Inventory Manual. DeKalb, IL: Psytec Inc.Google Scholar
- Thomas, D., Leicht, C., Hughes, C., Madigan, A., & Dowell, K. (2006). Emerging practices in the prevention of child abuse and neglect. Washington, DC: Children’s Bureau Office on Child Abuse and Neglect.Google Scholar
- U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Children’s Bureau. (2018). Child Maltreatment 2016. Available from https://www.acf.hhs.gov/cb/research-data-technology/statistics-research/child maltreatment. Accessed 15 April 2018.
- Widom, C. S. (2017). Long-term impact of childhood abuse and neglect on crime and violence. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 24, 186–202.Google Scholar