Getting to Know Your International Contacts—Part 2

This week I selected the alternate selection, which was to learn three new ideas from the Harvard University.  The measurement of program impacts the differences between the treatment and comparison groups on a range of outcomes of interest is a central feature of the evaluation process.   Two recent developments have stimulated growing public discussion about the right balance between individual and shared responsibility for child well-being.  The first is the explosion of research in neuroscience and other developmental sciences that highlights the extent to which the interaction between genetics and early experience creates either a sturdy or weak foundation for all the learning, behavior, and health that follow. The second is the increasingly recognized need for a highly skilled workforce and healthy adult population to confront the growing challenges of global economic competition and the rising costs of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid for the aging baby boomers. The early development of cognitive skills, emotional well-being, social competence, and sound physical and mental health builds a strong foundation for success well into the adult years. Beyond their short-term importance for positive school achievement, these abilities are critical prerequisites for economic productivity and responsible citizenship throughout life. All aspects of adult human capital, from work force skills to cooperative and lawful behavior, build on capacities that are developed during childhood and beginning at birth. As the science of early childhood development, progress to­wards this goal will be most effective if innovative actions are guided by an understanding of four interrelated dimen­sions that together comprise a new framework for improv­ing physical and mental well-being: (1) the biology of health; (2) the foundations of health; (3) caregiver and community.  (Shonkoff et al, 2012)

 Four decades of program evaluation research point to the following “effectiveness factors” that can enhance development in the first five years of life:

• Access to basic medical care for pregnant women and children can help prevent

threats to healthy development as well as provide early diagnosis and appropriate

management when problems emerge.

• Environmental policies that reduce the level of known neurotoxins in the environment

will protect embryos, fetuses, and young children from exposure to substances that

damage their developing brains.

• Not all services are effective. Center-based programs that have positive impacts on

young children’s development provides some combination of the following features:

o   small class sizes and high adult-to-child ratios;

o   a language-rich environment;

o   age-appropriate curricula and stimulating materials in a safe physical setting;

o   warm, responsive interactions between staff and children; and

o   high and consistent levels of child participation.

 Programs that cost less because they employ less skilled staff are a waste of money if they do not have the expertise needed to produce measurable impacts.   Scaling up successful, model interventions into effective, multi-site programs is a formidable challenge that can be addressed, at least in part, by establishing quality standards and monitoring service delivery on a routine basis.

References

Harvard University’s “Global Children’s Initiative” website (http://developingchild.harvard.edu/initiatives/global_initiative/)

Shonkoff, Jack P., Richter, Linda, van der Gaag, Jacques, and Bhutta, Zulfiqar A. (2012). An Integrated Scientific Framework for Child Survival and Early Childhood Development.Pediatrics, 129 (2), 460-472.