Is Sure Start an Effective Preventive Intervention?

BACKGROUND   Sure Start was established with the aim of eliminating child poverty and social exclusion. METHOD   The findings from the reports of the National Evaluation of Sure Start Team, published in November 2005, are reviewed and critiqued. RESULTS   The family and child functioning after 3 years of Sure Start, as compared with Sure Start-to-be areas, showed very few significant differences, with some indication of adverse effects in the most disadvantaged families. CONCLUSIONS   These findings are discussed in relation to their service, research and policy implications-with the conclusion that the research evaluation was well conducted, but the findings are inconclusive. There are lessons on how to improve Sure Start and what should have been done differently.

[1]  C. Judd,et al.  Statistical difficulties of detecting interactions and moderator effects. , 1993, Psychological bulletin.

[2]  Norman Glass,et al.  Sure Start: the development of an early intervention programme for young children in the United Kingdom , 1999 .

[3]  Joann L. Robinson,et al.  Update on home visiting for pregnant women and parents of young children. , 2000, Current problems in pediatrics.

[4]  Joann L. Robinson,et al.  Effects of Nurse Home-Visiting on Maternal Life Course and Child Development: Age 6 Follow-Up Results of a Randomized Trial , 2004, Pediatrics.

[5]  Joann L. Robinson,et al.  Effects of Home Visits by Paraprofessionals and by Nurses: Age 4 Follow-Up Results of a Randomized Trial , 2004, Pediatrics.

[6]  R. Mccall,et al.  Some lessons learned on evaluating community-based, two-generation service programs: The case of the Comprehensive Child development program , 2003 .

[7]  J. Weisz,et al.  The lab versus the clinic. Effects of child and adolescent psychotherapy. , 1992, The American psychologist.

[8]  J. Weisz,et al.  Mechanisms of action in youth psychotherapy. , 2002, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[9]  Stephen J Ceci,et al.  The rhetoric and reality of gap closing: when the "have-nots" gain but the "haves" gain even more . , 2005, The American psychologist.

[10]  R. Reading,et al.  The National Evaluation of Sure Start Research Team Effects of Sure Start local programmes on children and families: early findings from a quasi-experimental, cross sectional study , 2006 .

[11]  D. Olweus.  Bully/victim problems among schoolchildren: Basic facts and effects of a school based intervention program. , 1991 .

[12]  Michael Rutter,et al.  School Effectiveness Findings 1979–2002 , 2002 .

[13]  C. Henderson,et al.  Effect of prenatal and infancy home visitation by nurses on pregnancy outcomes, childhood injuries, and repeated childbearing. A randomized controlled trial. , 1997, JAMA.

[14]  A. Pickles,et al.  Time trends in adolescent mental health. , 2004, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[15]  Joann L. Robinson,et al.  Home visiting by paraprofessionals and by nurses: a randomized, controlled trial. , 2002, Pediatrics.

[16]  C. Henderson,et al.  Improving the delivery of prenatal care and outcomes of pregnancy: a randomized trial of nurse home visitation. , 1986, Pediatrics.

[17]  C. Henderson,et al.  Preventing child abuse and neglect with a program of nurse home visitation: the limiting effects of domestic violence. , 2000, JAMA.

[18]  David J. Smith,et al.  Psychosocial Disorders in Young People: Time Trends and their Causes , 1996 .

[19]  D. Olds.  Prenatal and Infancy Home Visiting by Nurses: From Randomized Trials to Community Replication , 2002, Prevention Science.

[20]  D. Olds,et al.  Taking preventive intervention to scale: The nurse-family partnership * , 2003 .

[21]  C. Henderson,et al.  Long-term effects of nurse home visitation on children's criminal and antisocial behavior: 15-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. , 1998, JAMA.