Kirigin, K. A., Braukman, C. J., Atwater, J. D., & Wolf, M. M. (1982). An evaluation of Teaching-Family (Achievement Place) group homes for juvenile offenders. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 15(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1982.15-1

Type of Study: Pretest–posttest study with a nonequivalent control group (Quasi-experimental)
Number of Participants: Treatment: 140; Comparison: 52

Population:

• Age — 14–15 years
• Race/Ethnicity — Treatment: Female: 82% White and 18% Non-White; Male: 76% White and 24% Non-White; Comparison: Female: 83% White and 17% Non-White; Male: 77% White and 23% Non-White
• Gender — 124 Male and 68 Female
• Status — Participants were youths assigned to residential programs by the court.

Location/Institution: Kansas

Summary: (To include basic study design, measures, results, and notable limitations)
The purpose of the study was to compare the effectiveness of the prototype program at Achievement Place and of several replication programs with the effectiveness of programs not using the Teaching-Family Model (TFM). Participants were youth in group homes using the TFM compared to youths in group homes chosen by state agencies to be representative residential programs. Measures utilized include administrative data from court and police records providing information on offenses, alleged offenses, and institutional confinements. Results indicate that for girls, a higher percentage of TFM participants had offenses pretreatment, but a significantly lower percentage had offenses during treatment. During the posttreatment year, a lower percentage of both boys and girls in the program had offenses, but this was not statistically significant. Looking at rate of offenses, TFM boys significantly decreased their number of offenses during treatment, while the rate for non-TFM boys increased. For girls, the number of offenses was significantly reduced during treatment, but they did not differ significantly from the comparison group during that time. For both boys and girls, groups did not differ in rate of offenses during the follow-up period. Limitations include the lack of randomization of participants and generalizable only to youth in residential programs.

Length of controlled postintervention follow-up: 1 year.

Bedlington, M. M., Braukman, C. J., Ramp, K. A., & Wolfe, M. M. (1988). A comparison of treatment environments in community-based group homes for adolescent offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 15(3), 349–363. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854888015003007

Type of Study: Pretest–posttest study with a nonequivalent control group (Quasi-experimental)
Number of Participants: TFM: 82; Comparison: 103

Population:

• Age — 11–17 years
• Race/Ethnicity — TFM: 77% Caucasian; Comparison: 71% Caucasian
• Gender — Not Specified
• Status — Participants were court-adjudicated youth assigned to group homes.

Location/Institution: Kansas

Summary: (To include basic study design, measures, results, and notable limitations)
The purpose of the study was to examine several environmental dimensions in 11 group home programs. Participants were group homes using the Teaching-Family Model (TFM) that were compared to non-TFM homes. Measures utilized include the Self-Reported Delinquency (SRD) questionnaire and researcher developed measures to create observation protocols to measure adult/youth interactions, teaching, intolerance of deviance, youth social behavior, pleasantness of the environment, and family-likeness. Results indicate that TFM homes were rated as having significantly higher levels of adult/youth communication and instances of adults teaching youth. Limitations include nonrandomization of participants, reliance on self-reported measures, and lack of follow-up.

Length of controlled postintervention follow-up: None.

Slot, N. W., Jagers, H. D., & Dangel, R. F. (1992). Cross-cultural replication and evaluation of the Teaching Family Model of community-based residential treatment. Behavioral Residential Treatment, 7(5), 341–354. https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.2360070503

Type of Study: Study 1: One-group pretest–posttest study; Study 2 & Study 3: Pretest–posttest study with a nonequivalent control group (Quasi-experimental)
Number of Participants: Study 1: 58; Study 2: 520; Study 3: 114

Population:

• Age — Study 1: 14.2–19.1 years; Study 2: Not specified; Study 3:14–18.3 years
• Race/Ethnicity — Not specified
• Gender — 100% Male
• Status — Participants were youth in a Dutch residential facility.

Location/Institution: The Netherlands and Canada

Summary: (To include basic study design, measures, results, and notable limitations)
The purpose of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a cross-cultural replication of the Teaching-Family Model (TFM) in residential care called Kursushuis in three studies. Study 1 compared the pretreatment and posttreatment scores of Kursushuis youth on several measures of antisocial behavior and social competence. Study 2 compared the offending patterns of Kursushuis youth with those of a nontreatment group of Canadian youth. Study 3 compared the effects and cost of placement in the Kursushuis programs with those of placement in a Dutch State Correctional Institute. Measures utilized include the Youth Evaluation List (YEL). Results indicate that for Study 1 significant improvements were shown in overall adjustment, family adjustment, relationship with parents, number of offenses, social competence, and number of problems at home. Results also indicate that there was a significant increase in drinking posttreatment, but not to levels considered problematic in the Netherlands. Results indicate that for Study 2 in youth experiencing the Teaching Family Program (TFP) [now called the Teaching-Family Model (TFM)] the number of youth staying at the same offending level was lower for the TFP group than the comparison group (24% vs. 48%). Results indicate that for Study 3 there were no differences between groups on scores for overall problems and abilities for relationships outside the family; both groups improved. Limitations include the nonrandomization of participants in all 3 studies, lack of comparison group in Study 1, and length of follow-up.

Length of controlled postintervention follow-up: 6 months (Studies 1 & 2 only).

Thompson, R. W., Smith, G. L., Osgood, D. W., Dowd, T. P., Friman, P. C., & Daly, D. L. (1996). Residential care: A study of short- and long-term educational effects. Children and Youth Services Review, 18(3), 221–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/0190-7409(96)00002-3

Type of Study: Pretest–posttest study with a nonequivalent control group (Quasi-experimental)
Number of Participants: 497 Treatment; 84 Comparison

Population:

• Age — Treatment: Mean=14.7 years; Comparison: Mean=14.4 years
• Race/Ethnicity — Treatment: 68% Caucasian, 21% Black, 7% Hispanic, and 4% Other; Comparison: 71% Caucasian, 20% Black, 6% Hispanic, and 3% Other
• Gender — 92% Male and 8% Female
• Status — Treatment: Participants were youth admitted to the residential treatment program on referral by social services; Comparison: Participants were youth who applied but were not admitted to the residential treatment program.

Location/Institution: Boy’s Town home campus, Nebraska

Summary: (To include basic study design, measures, results, and notable limitations)
The purpose of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the Teaching Family Model (TFM) on school performance and attitudes for children who applied for admission to the Boy’s Town residential program. Participants were admitted to the TFM program, and the control group was comprised of those who were admitted, but did not enter the program. Measures utilized include self-reported grade point average (GPA), highest level of school completed, and completion of diploma or GED. Results indicate that there was an increase in GPA for the treatment group while they were in residence. It decreased after leaving the program but remained significantly higher than the comparison group’s GPA. The treatment youth completed years of school at a faster rate than comparison students, but this rate decreased significantly after leaving treatment. Results also indicate that there were higher rates of graduation and GED completion for treatment youth, although this was not statistically significant. Ratings on importance of education increased for the treatment group but decreased for the comparison group. This difference remained after departure. Treatment youth had more help with homework both during and after the program than did comparison youth. Limitations include nonrandomization of participants and the results do not pinpoint what treatment experiences were responsible for the effects.

Length of controlled postintervention follow-up: Approximately 4 years.

Friman, P. C., Osgood, D. W., Smith, G. L., Shanahan, D. L., Thompson, R. W., Larzelere, R. E., & Daly, D. L. (1996). A longitudinal evaluation of prevalent negative beliefs about residential placement for troubled adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 24(3), 299–324. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01441633

Type of Study: Pretest–posttest study with a nonequivalent control group (Quasi-experimental)
Number of Participants: 581

Population:

• Age — 10–17 years
• Race/Ethnicity — 70% Caucasian, 20% African American, 7% Hispanic, and 3% Other
• Gender — 92% Male and 8% Female
• Status — Treatment: Participants were youth admitted to the residential treatment program on referral by social services; Comparison: Participants were youth who applied but were not admitted to the residential treatment program.

Location/Institution: Boys Town, Nebraska

Summary: (To include basic study design, measures, results, and notable limitations)
The study used the same sample as Thompson et al. (1996). The purpose of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the Teaching-Family Model (TFM) for improving adolescent attitudes about residential treatment. Participants were assigned to a treatment group for a duration of 18 to 21 months, and the remainder to a treatment-as-usual comparison group. Measures utilized include the Delivery of Helpful Treatment and Satisfaction with Supervising Adults questionnaires, the National Youth Survey, and the Locus of Control Scale. Results indicate that the TFM group’s ratings were significantly more positive than the comparison group on four of the five scales. Limitations include a lack of randomization and the comparison group experienced high attrition.

Length of controlled postintervention follow-up: Varied.

Jones, R. J., & Timbers, G. D. (2003). Minimizing the need for physical restraint and seclusion in residential youth care through skill-based treatment programming. Families in Society, 84(1), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1606/1044-3894.81

Type of Study: Pretest–posttest study with a nonequivalent control group (Quasi-experimental)
Number of Participants: Barium Springs: Average=26.5 per month; Bridgehouse: Average=8.8 per month

Population:

• Age — 8–18 years
• Race/Ethnicity — Not specified
• Gender — Not specified
• Status — Participants were youth in two residential programs for behavioral and emotional problems.

Location/Institution: Barium Springs Home for Children, NC and Bridgehouse Program, IA

Summary: (To include basic study design, measures, results, and notable limitations)
The purpose of the study was to detail an analysis of data kept by two residential programs for youth on the use of physical restraint or other coercive measures such as seclusion per client prior to and following the implementation of the Teaching-Family Program (TFP) [now called the Teaching-Family Model (TFM)]. Participants were staff from the Barium Springs treatment facility and staff from the Bridgehouse Program who had participated in the TFP. Results indicate that for the Barium Springs program, restraints were reduced by 40% and significant negative incident reports were reduced by 80% after the introduction of the TFP. At the Bridgehouse program, there was a 75% reduction in restraints; a similar decline in secluding clients in a locked, quiet room; and close to elimination of the use of the time out room after the introduction of TFP. With the exception of the Barium Springs restraint level, all of these reductions reached statistical significance. Limitations include reliability of archival data and lack of follow-up.

Length of controlled postintervention follow-up: None.

Lewis, R. E. (2005). The effectiveness of families first services: An experimental study. Children and Youth Services Review, 27(5), 499–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2004.10.009

Type of Study: Randomized controlled trial
Number of Participants: 150 families

Population:

• Age — 3.9–17.3 years
• Race/Ethnicity — Not specified
• Gender — 75% Male
• Status — Participants were families referred by school or juvenile court due to a child with serious problems in functioning.

Location/Institution: Utah Youth Village

Summary: (To include basic study design, measures, results, and notable limitations)
The purpose of the study was to evaluate an adaptation of the Teaching-Family Model (TFM) of therapeutic group home programming with some elements of child welfare intensive family preservation services. Participants were randomly assigned to treatment or control groups. Measures utilized include study developed measures that assessed concrete services/physical care and resources, parent effectiveness/parent-child relationships, and child behavior problems. Results indicate that a composite score of the 63 questionnaire items showed a significant positive overall effect of the intervention and both posttests. For the subscales, concrete services/physical care and resources showed improvements, as did child behavior problems. There was no significant difference across groups for parent effectiveness/parent-child relationships due to improvement in the control group’s score over time. The authors note that all group differences narrowed over time largely due to the control group having received some traditional services. Limitations include the reliance on self report, the use of study developed measures, and the length of follow-up.

Length of controlled postintervention follow-up: 3 months.

Lee, B. R., & Thompson, R. (2008). Comparing outcomes for youth in treatment foster care and family-style group care. Children and Youth Services Review, 30(7), 746–757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.12.002

Type of Study: Pretest–posttest study with a nonequivalent control group (Quasi-experimental)
Number of Participants: 828

Population:

• Age — Mean=13 years
• Race/Ethnicity — 56% Caucasian
• Gender — 50% Male and 50% Female
• Status — Participants were youth with presenting problem behaviors in residential care for at least 30 days at Girls and Boys Town locations.

Location/Institution: Omaha, Nebraska; North Florida, Louisiana, Washington, DC, Philadelphia, Western Iowa/Nebraska, and New England

Summary: (To include basic study design, measures, results, and notable limitations)
The purpose of the study was to use propensity matching on 18 background variables to evaluate the effectiveness of Teaching-Family Model (TFM)-based group home services with treatment foster care services in a sample of youth with problem behaviors in residential care. Participants were youth from Girls and Boys Town programs that were in treatment foster care and group care that were enrolled in the TFM program. Measures utilized include administrative data to evaluate for youth outcomes, such as favorable discharge, returning home, legal involvement, formal placements, and homelike setting. Results indicate that group care youth were more likely to be favorably discharged, more likely to return home, and less likely to experience subsequent placement in the first 6 months after discharge. Legal involvement and residing in a home-like environment at follow-up did not differ. Limitations include the lack of randomization and the lack of standardized measures of youth behavior problems and mental health needs.

Length of controlled postintervention follow-up: 6 months.

Farmer , E. M., Wagner, H. R., Burns, B. J., & Murray, M. (2016). Who goes where? Exploring factors related to placement among group homes. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 24(1), 54–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/1063426615585082

Type of Study: Other quasi-experimental
Number of Participants: 554

Population:

• Age — 4-20 years (Mean=15 years)
• Race/Ethnicity — 70% African American, 46% Non-White, 14% Multi-Racial, 8% American Indian, and 6% Hispanic
• Gender — 52% Male
• Status — Participants were adolescents in a residential care facility.

Location/Institution: A Southeastern state

Summary: (To include basic study design, measures, results, and notable limitations)
The purpose of the study was to explore potential variations among group homes to examine whether different programs are systematically serving different types of youth. The study evaluated the effectiveness of placement in homes using the Teaching-Family Model (TFM), versus homes that did not. Participants were youth in group homes using TFM versus youth in group homes that did not. Measures utilized include the Restrictiveness of Living Environment Scale (ROLES) and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Results indicate that demographics are not significantly associated with TFM placement. However, custody status, types of mental health problems, and use of psychotropic medications are. Homes appear to be serving distinct niches within a geographic area. Limitations include the study only being conducted in a single state, missing data, all included agencies operated at least two group homes; hence the full range of homes, particularly the small single-home operations are not included in these results, and lack of follow-up.

Length of controlled postintervention follow-up: None.

Farmer, E. M. Z., Seifert, H., Wagner, H. R., Burns, B. J., & Murray, M. (2017). Does model matter? Examining change across time for youth in group homes. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 25(2), 119–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/1063426616630520

Type of Study: Other quasi-experimental
Number of Participants: 554

Population:

• Age — 4–20 years (Mean=15 years)
• Race/Ethnicity — 70% African American, 46% Non-White, 14% Multi-Racial, 8% American Indian, and 6% Hispanic
• Gender — 52% Male
• Status — Participants were adolescents in a residential care facility.

Location/Institution: A Southeastern state

Summary: (To include basic study design, measures, results, and notable limitations)
The study used the same sample as Farmer et al. (2016) The purpose of the study was to examine differences across time for youth served in group homes utilizing the Teaching Family Model (TFM) and geographically proximate homes using more eclectic approaches. Participants were youth in group homes using TFM versus youth in group homes that did not. Measures utilized include the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Results indicate that youth showed, on average, significant and rapid improvement during initial months in a group home. Improvement did not differ for TFM and non-TFM homes during this initial period. Postdischarge results, though, show that TFM was associated with continued improvement after discharge and significantly better outcomes by 8 months postdischarge. Limitations include the study only being conducted in a single state, missing data, and all included agencies operated at least two group homes; hence, the full range of homes, particularly the small single-home operations are not included in these results.

Length of controlled postintervention follow-up: 8 months.