The Baby TALK approach: An innovative early intervention model to support high-risk families in Early Head Start programs

Baby TALK's model approach to identifying at-risk families (personal encounters) allows early childhood professionals to identify high-risk participants early and implement supportive or intervention services as soon as possible.

Transcript

2.   Describe Baby TALK’s model of intervention, specifically the home visitation model targeting high-risk families with infants and toddlers in Early Head Start programs.   Discuss innovative components of the model that support early identification of candidates for Early Head Start and Head Start programs.   Share current research on the Baby TALK model.   Discuss the ways in which the Baby TALK model can be replicated and adapted in other Head Start, Early Head Start, and early childhood and community settings across the country.
3. A model for building a trustworthy system in which families are identified and appropriate services are delivered through both personal and group experiences and collaborative referrals
5.   In 36 states and Canada   Demonstration program in Decatur, Illinois   In new communities as professionals are trained
6.   A commitment to building seamless systems, not taller silos!   A passion for reaching families with whatever they need to be successful with their children
7.   Build a system.   Screen every family.   Identify the need.   Deliver appropriate services.
8. In order to implement the model in your area, professionals must attend training through the Baby TALK Training Institute   What is the Training Institute?   What will I learn?   What support is available after training?
9.   Educators   Librarians   Health care providers   Early intervention providers   Case managers   Home visitors   Family support/social workers
12.   Hospital OB units   Clinical settings such as WIC, Prenatal Clinics, Pediatrician’s office, Health Department   Family Literacy   Home visits   Baby TALK Times   Pre-Kindergarten
14.   Every encounter will include ◦  Preparation ◦  Assessment of situation ◦  Affiliation ◦  Observation ◦  Developmental Behaviors ◦  Exploration of System of Support ◦  Introduction to BT and system of care ◦  Reflection
16. 1.  Early identification – can the model identify families early? 2.  Recruitment – does the model serve high- risk families? 3.  Retention – what elements of the model support high retention and return rates? 4.  Child and family outcomes – are there positive gains for participants?
17. PERSONAL ENCOUNTERS: In Prenatal Clinics, Hospitals, High School/Alternate Programs, WIC clinics, etc. PARENT ACTIVITIES: Intensive Home Visitation; Educational support for high school/GED diploma; Education on child development content and positive parenting behaviors; Access to relevant social services CHILD ACTIVITIES: Intensive Home Visitation; Access to early childhood programming i.e. Early Head Start; Early Intervention, Lapsits; Family Fun Times activities PARENT SHORT TERM EFFECTS: Increased knowledge of child development, increased knowledge of effective parenting skills, increased confidence levels, increased academic skills that earn a GED or diploma, lowered parent toxic stress PARENT LONG TERM EFFECTS: Increased positive parent-child interactions, strengthened parenting skills, improved health seeking behavior, increased competence in accessing services, reduced child abuse/neglect, reduced drop-out rates, increased graduation rates CHILD - SHORT TERM EFFECTS: Increased educational experience 0-3 years, lowered toxic stress; CHILD - LONG TERM EFFECTS: Improved social, behavioral, language, and cognitive skills (school readiness), Fewer school-age placements in special education
18.   What did we study?   Who was involved?   Relevant comparison groups included ◦  Illinois Early Childhood Asset Map (IECAM) ◦  U.S. Census Bureau ◦  Head Start Family and Child Experience Survey (FACES 2003)
19.   The model’s approach to identifying at- risk families (personal encounters) allows early childhood professional to identify high-risk participants early and implement supportive or intervention services as soon as possible.
20. 19.1% 36.2% 28.5% 16.3% 33.1% 37.3% 25.8% 3.7% 0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% Baby TALK (n=5,370) Head Start (n=2,289)
21.   Remaining percentages reported “other;” or “self- employed or student” 50.8% 42.2% 52.8% 47.3% 0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% Employed Unemployed Baby TALK (n=4,903) Head Start (n=2,165)
22.   Remaining percentages reported divorced, separated, or widowed 42.4% 53.1% 4.5% 59.9% 22.8% 17.2% 40.6% 40.9% 18.5% 0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% Married Single *Other Baby TALK (n=5,100) Macon County (n=82,167) Head Start (n=2,297)
23. 34.1% 13.9% 10.7% 9.6% 7.6% 24.1% 35.8% 34.7% 17.2% 6.6% 3.2% 2.6% 0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% Baby TALK (n=2,960) Head Start (n=2,315)
24. Mothers under the age of 20 (n=234)   72% of young mothers had less than a high school diploma.   51.9% of young moms lived with extended family while 17.6% lived in single-parent homes. Only 9.9% lived in a two-parent household   82.7% of young mothers made less than $10,000 annually   44.2% of young moms reported being unemployed at the time of identification. Only 12.1% said they were employed and the remaining percentages reported student status.   56.7% of young moms identified as Black, 34.8% identified as White, 2.3% identified as Hispanic and 3.2% reported Other
25. The top three Decatur locations were: 1.  Hospital settings ◦  56% of mothers (2,419 mothers) were identified at Decatur Memorial Hospital and St. Mary’s hospital combined 2.  A public health facility for low-income mothers ◦  22% (937 mothers) were located at the Women, Infant, and Children (WIC) social service office. 3.  A community health clinic ◦  An additional 10% (424 mothers) were identified at the Community Health Improvement Center (CHIC) Decatur office.
26. Young mothers under the age of 20 years were first encountered in the following top five Decatur locations: 1.  Hospital settings (29% - 168 moms) 2.  A local WIC social service office (30% - 170 moms) 3.  A community health clinic (13% - 76 moms) 4.  High school and alternative high school programs (11% - 65 moms) 5.  Local public libraries (7% - 40 moms)
27.   What do these findings suggest for best practices in early childhood interventions?   What is the connectoin between Baby TALK and Early Head Start programs?   What are the policy implications for these preliminary findings?
28. Website: www.babytalk.org Claudia Quigg, M.Ed. Baby TALK Inc., Founding Executive Director cquigg@babytalk.org Aimee Hilado, Ph.D. Loyola University Chicago ahilado@luc.edu Christine Leow, Ph.D. Branch Associates, Inc. cleow@branchassoc.com