The Impact of the Family Start Home Visiting Programme on Outcomes for Mothers and Children - A Quasi-Experimental Study

Sep 8, 2026

Upload by Finn

Examining the Family Start home visiting model, this quasi-experimental study evaluates how participation affects outcomes for mothers and children. The research uses linked administrative data, defines key outcome domains across education and health engagement and child maltreatment-related measures, and applies an estimation strategy combining propensity score matching at the individual level with fixed effects at the community level. Results include descriptive statistics, subgroup findings, common-trend tests, and sensitivity checks for multiple inference. Disclosure conditions and confidentiality-related random rounding are addressed for all reported counts.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryGeneral

FormatDOCX

Pages99

Reading Time35 min

AccessFree to download

Executive Summary

1. Introduction

2. Family Start

2.1 The Family Start Programme

2.2 Family Start and Early Start

2.3 Expansion of Family Start

3. Data Sources and Outcomes

3.1 Linked Administrative Data

3.2 Outcomes

4. Estimation Strategy

4.1 Propensity Score Matching (Individual Level)

4.2 Fixed Effects (Community Level)

4.3 Sub-group Analysis

4.4 Comparing Propensity Score Matching to Fixed Effects

4.5 Interpreting Effect Sizes

5. Results

5.1 Descriptive Statistics

5.2 Early Childhood Education and Health Service Engagement

5.3 Maltreatment Marker Injuries and CYF Contact

5.4 Mortality

5.5 Sub-group Analysis

5.6 Testing Common Trends

5.7 Correcting for Multiple Inference

5.8 Summary of PSM Results

6. Limitations

7. Relevance to Family Start Today

8. Conclusion

References

Appendix A. History of the Family Start Programme

Appendix B. Data Linkage

The Impact of the Family Start Home Visiting Programme on Outcomes for Mothers and Children A Quasi-Experimental Study February 2016 RhemaVaithianathan1,2 Moira Wilson3 Tim Maloney1 Sarah Baird4 1 Department of Economics, AUT, Auckland, New Zealand 2 Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Research on the Economics of Ageing, Singapore Management University 3 Ministry of Social Development (MSD), Wellington, New Zealand 4 Department of Global Health, Milken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA Please send correspondence to: rvaithia@aut.ac.nz Acknowledgements The research was supported by funding from Community Investment (MSD) and in-kind contributions from AUT and MSD. The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance and advice provided by the many people who helped at different stages of the project. Officials from the Ministries of Health, Education, and Social Development, Te Puni Kōkiri, the Departments of Corrections and Internal Affairs and Statistics New Zealand provided assistance with data supply and interpretation, secure data housing and access and programme expertise, and participated in discussions on interpretation of results. Particular thanks are due to Dr Irene de Haan, University of Auckland, Stephanie Cowan, Change for our Children, Christchurch, Dr Beverly Lawton, University of Otago Wellington, and Donna Matahaere-Atariki, Community Investment Māori Reference Group, for their assistance and advice; to Associate Professor Tue Gørgens, Research School of Economics, ANU College of Business and Economics and Dr Dean Hyslop, ‎Senior Fellow, Motu Economic & Public Policy Research for statistical advice; and to Emeritus Professor David Fergusson, University of Otago Christchurch, Professor John Leventhal, Medical Director, Yale-New Haven Children's Hospital Child Abuse Programme, and Professor David Rubin, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania for invaluable expert peer review. Support provided by Anita Staneva (AUT) and Rissa Ota (MSD) is gratefully acknowledged. Disclaimer Access to the data used in this study was provided by Statistics New Zealand under conditions designed to give effect to the security and confidentiality provisions of the Statistics Act 1975. The results presented in this study are the work of the authors, not Statistics NZ. The views expressed are those of the researchers. They do not necessarily reflect the position of MSD or those involved in the advisory or review processes. MSD has made every effort to ensure the information in this report is reliable, but does not guarantee its accuracy and does not accept liability for any errors. Note on Random Rounding All counts presented in this study have had Statistics New Zealand confidentiality rules applied. This includes the random rounding of all counts to base 3. Therefore, the sample counts presented are not exact, and in some cases aggregating sub-samples will not yield the exact population counts. Published Ministry of Social Development. Wellington. ISBN 978-0-478-32394-8 (Online) Contents TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u HYPERLINK \l "_Toc434841206" Executive Summary PAGEREF _Toc434841206 \h 6 HYPERLINK \l "_Toc434841207" 1. Introduction PAGEREF _Toc434841207 \h 10 HYPERLINK \l "_Toc434841208" 2. Family Start PAGEREF _Toc434841208 \h 12 HYPERLINK \l "_Toc434841209" 2.1 The Family Start Programme PAGEREF _Toc434841209 \h 12 HYPERLINK \l "_Toc434841210" 2.2 Family Start and Early Start PAGEREF _Toc434841210 \h 14 HYPERLINK \l "_Toc434841211" 2.3 Expansion of Family Start PAGEREF _Toc434841211 \h 16 HYPERLINK \l "_Toc434841212" 3. Data Sources and Outcomes PAGEREF _Toc434841212 \h 18 HYPERLINK \l "_Toc434841213" 3.1 Linked Administrative Data PAGEREF _Toc434841213 \h 18 HYPERLINK \l "_Toc434841214" 3.2 Outcomes PAGEREF _Toc434841214 \h 19 HYPERLINK \l "_Toc434841215" 4. Estimation Strategy PAGER

FAQs

What research design does the study use to assess Family Start outcomes?

The report applies a quasi-experimental approach to compare outcomes associated with the Family Start home visiting programme.

How are outcomes measured in this study?

Outcomes are derived from linked administrative data, covering domains such as early childhood education and health service engagement, maltreatment-related marker injuries and CYF contact, and mortality.

What estimation methods are used in the analysis?

The study combines propensity score matching at the individual level with fixed effects at the community level, includes subgroup analysis, compares the two approaches, and interprets effect sizes.

Sep 8, 2026

Upload by Finn