On The Way Home®
On the Way Home® (OTWH) is designed to support families with youth ages 12–18 as youth transition from residential out-of-home care to home, school, and community settings. OTWH supports this transition by empowering families, enhancing family relationships, and supporting academic engagement and success. The program integrates three interventions: Check & Connect , Common Sense Parenting (CSP), and homework support.
Check & Connect is a school dropout prevention program. The “Check” component consists of family consultants monitoring the youth’s school engagement (e.g., tardiness, absences, detentions, suspensions) and level of risk for dropout. All youth receive a basic “Connect” intervention where the family consultant holds brief weekly conversations with the youth, their caregivers, and a school-based mentor. During these meetings, family consultants discuss educational goals and emphasize the importance of school engagement. If high-risk behaviors are identified in the Check component, youth receive intensive Connect interventions designed to promote school engagement. The intensive format consists of both general interventions, such as basic problem solving, and targeted interventions. Targeted interventions address specific risk behavior(s) and youth’s individual needs (e.g., addressing logistical problems for school absenteeism, one-on-one tutoring to address failing classes).
Common Sense Parenting (CSP) is a six-session group-based parenting education program. OTWH uses a proprietary, modified CSP curriculum to deliver parenting education in an individual format in the home. The goals of this program are to help parents encourage their children’s positive behavior, establish effective discipline strategies, and regulate their own emotions. An additional modification is that the family consultant continues to follow up with parents on skills learned in the program beyond the end of the 6-week intervention.
The homework support intervention is designed to encourage parental involvement in the youth’s homework routine. It includes a basic component and an enhanced component. All youth receive the basic component, which includes a homework checklist and a system for monitoring homework completion. For youth who continue to struggle with homework completion or who are struggling in one or more academic areas, family consultants implement the enhanced component of the homework intervention. In the enhanced component, the family consultant meets with the caregiver, youth, and school staff to identify additional strategies to promote academic success (e.g., identifying a tutor, contacting a homework helpline, establishing a consequence system).
OTWH is rated as a promising practice because at least one study achieved a rating of moderate or high on study design and execution and demonstrated a favorable effect on a target outcome.
Date Last Reviewed (Handbook Version 1.0): Jun 2022
Sources
The program or service description, target population, and program or service delivery and implementation information were informed by the following sources: the program or service manual, the program or service developer’s website, and the studies reviewed.
This information does not necessarily represent the views of the program or service developers. For more information on how this program or service was reviewed, download the Handbook of Standards and Procedures, Version 1.0
Target Population
OTWH is designed to serve families with youth ages 12–18 transitioning from residential out-of-home care to home, school, and community settings.
Dosage
OTWH services are provided for up to 12 months after a youth exits an out-of-home placement. The CSP intervention is delivered over 6 weekly individual sessions. Each session lasts about 1 hour. The Check & Connect and homework support interventions are delivered throughout the duration of the program. The frequency of these interventions is based on child and family needs and is specified in the service plan.
Across all three interventions, family consultants typically provide 2 hours per week of direct services (e.g., Connect interventions, CSP parenting sessions, homework support) and 1 hour per week of indirect services (e.g., developing and monitoring the youth and family’s service plan) to youth and families. Family consultants complete the Check component of Check & Connect, typically once per week.
Location/Delivery Setting
Recommended Locations/Delivery Settings
OTWH is delivered in participants’ homes and in school and community settings.
Location/Delivery Settings Observed in the Research
- Home
- School
Education, Certifications and Training
The program is implemented by a family consultant and a school-based mentor. Family consultants typically have a bachelor’s degree or prior experience in psychology, social work, education, human services, or a related field. School-based mentors must be employed by the school or district and meet education requirements determined by the school or district implementing the program. Program supervisors oversee family consultants and typically have advanced education and experience in the field. Family consultants and school-based mentors are required to complete program training.
Program or Service Documentation
Book/Manual/Available documentation used for review
The On the Way Home Program Manual is implemented in conjunction with the Common Sense Parenting Instructional Guide.
Boys Town. (2021). On the Way Home program manual. Boys Town Press.
Boys Town. (2021). Common Sense Parenting® (OTWH Edition) instructional guide. Boys Town Press.
Available languages
OTWH materials are available in English.
Other supporting materials
For More Information
Website: https://www.boystowntraining.org/on-the-way-home.html
Phone: (800) 545-5771
Email: training@boystown.org
Note: The details on Dosage; Location; Education, Certifications, and Training; Other Supporting Materials; and For More Information sections above are provided to website users for informational purposes only. This information is not exhaustive and may be subject to change.
| Results of Search and Review | Number of Studies Identified and Reviewed for On The Way Home® |
|---|---|
| Identified in Search | 2 |
| Eligible for Review | 2 |
| Rated High | 0 |
| Rated Moderate | 2 |
| Rated Low | 0 |
| Reviewed Only for Risk of Harm | 0 |
| Outcome | Effect Size
 and Implied Percentile Effect
|
N of Studies (Findings) | N of Participants | Summary of Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Child permanency: Out-of-home placement |
0.33
12 |
2 (5) | 278 |
Favorable:
1 No Effect: 4 Unfavorable: 0 |
Note: For the effect sizes and implied percentile effects reported in the table, a positive number favors the intervention group and a negative number favors the comparison group.
| Outcome | Effect Size
and Implied Percentile Effect
|
N of Studies (Findings) | N of Participants | Summary of Findings |
Months after treatment when outcome measured
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Child permanency: Out-of-home placement |
0.33
12 |
2 (5) | 278 |
Favorable:
1 No Effect: 4 Unfavorable: 0 |
- |
| Study 14204 - OTWH vs. Business as Usual (First 44 Participants) (Trout, 2012) | |||||
| School & Home Placement Change Questionnaire: Child Currently Living in a Community-Based Placement (%) |
1.06
35 |
- | 44 | - | 0 |
| School & Home Placement Change Questionnaire: Child Currently Living in a Community-Based Placement (%, 6 Months After Baseline) |
1.53
43 |
- | 44 | - | 0 |
| School & Home Placement Change Questionnaire: Child Currently Living in a Community-Based Placement (%, 9 Months After Baseline) |
1.69
45 |
- | 44 | - | 0 |
| Study 14204 - OTWH vs Services as Usual (Trout, 2013) | |||||
| School & Home Placement Change Questionnaire: Child Currently Living in a Community-Based Placement (%, 6 Months After Baseline) |
1.39
*
41 |
- | 79 | - | 0 |
| Study 14206 - OTWH vs. Traditional Aftercare Supports (Trout, 2020) | |||||
| School & Home Placement Change Questionnaire: Child Currently Living in a Community-Based Placement |
0.00
0 |
- | 155 | - | 0 |
*p <.05
Note: For the effect sizes and implied percentile effects reported in the table, a positive number favors the intervention group and a negative number favors the comparison group. Effect sizes and implied percentile effects were calculated by the Prevention Services Clearinghouse as described in the Handbook of Standards and Procedures, Version 1.0, Section 5.10.4 and may not align with effect sizes reported in individual publications. The Prevention Services Clearinghouse uses information reported in study documents and, when necessary, information provided by authors in response to author queries to assign study ratings and calculate effect sizes and statistical significance (see Section 7.3.2 in the Handbook of Standards and Procedures, Version 1.0). As a result, the effect sizes and statistical significance reported in the table may not align with the estimates as they are reported in study documents.
Only publications with eligible contrasts that met design and execution standards are included in the individual study findings table.
Full citations for the studies shown in the table are available in the "Studies Reviewed" section.
The participant characteristics display is an initial version. We encourage those interested in providing feedback to send suggestions to preventionservices@abtglobal.com.
The table below displays locations, the year, and participant demographics for studies that received moderate or high ratings on design and execution and that reported the information. Participant characteristics for studies with more than one intervention versus comparison group pair that received moderate or high ratings are shown separately in the table. Please note, the information presented here uses terminology directly from the study documents, when available. Studies that received moderate or high ratings on design and execution that did not include relevant participant demographic information would not be represented in this table.
For more information on how Clearinghouse reviewers record the information in the table, please see our Resource Guide on Study Participant Characteristics and Settings.
| Characteristics of the Participants in the Studies with Moderate or High Ratings | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Study Location
|
Study Year
|
Age or Grade-level
|
Race, Ethnicity, Nationality
|
Gender
|
Populations of Interest*
|
Household Socioeconomic Status
|
| Study 14204 - OTWH vs. Business as Usual (First 44 Participants) | ||||||
| Characteristics of the Children and Youth | ||||||
| Nebraska, USA | 2009 | Average age at intake: 16 years; Age range: 13-18 years; Average grade at intake: 10; Grade range: 8-12 |
75% Caucasian 23% African American 11% Native American 5% Other 2% Hispanic/Latino 2% Asian |
50% Female | 100% Middle and high school adolescents who were discharged from the Boys Town Continuum (out-of-home care) and returned to home, school, and community settings; 30% were taking psychotropic medications; 21% received special education | -- |
| Study 14206 - OTWH vs. Traditional Aftercare Supports | ||||||
| Characteristics of the Children and Youth | ||||||
| Nebraska, USA | 2012 | Average age: 15 years; Grade range: Grades 8–12 |
69% White 13% Latino/a |
58% Male | 100% Youths discharged from therapeutic residential agencies returning to home, school, and community settings identified with (i.e., receiving special education services via an IEP) or at-risk (i.e., DISC-IV mental health diagnosis on file) of a high-incidence disability. | -- |
| Characteristics of the Adults, Parents, or Caregivers | ||||||
| Nebraska, USA | 2012 | Average age: 45 years |
69% White 6% Latino/a |
73% Female 16% Male |
64% Biological parents | 45% Reported an annual income of less than $30,000 |
| Study 14204 - OTWH vs Services as Usual | ||||||
| Characteristics of the Children and Youth | ||||||
| Nebraska, USA | 2009 | Average age: 16 years; Age range: 13 to 18 years; Grade range: 8 to 12 |
60% Caucasian 14% African-American 3.5% Hispanic |
53% Male | 100% Youths discharged from residential care identified with (i.e., IEP) or at-risk of a high-incidence disability; 28% received special education services |
58% were living at or below the median income level of this region of the country (< $50,000) 14% of families of youth were living in extreme poverty (< $10,000) |
“--” indicates information not reported in the study.
* The information about disabilities is based on initial coding. For more information on how the Clearinghouse recorded disability information for the initial release, please see our Resource Guide on Study Participant Characteristics and Settings. The Clearinghouse is currently seeking consultation from experts, including those with lived experience, and input from the public to enhance and improve the display.
Note: Citations for the documents associated with each 5-digit study number shown in the table can be found in the “Studies Reviewed” section below. Study settings and participant demographics are recorded for all studies that received moderate or high ratings on design and execution and that reported the information. Studies that did not report any information about setting or participant demographics are not displayed. For more information on how participant characteristics are recorded, please see our Resource Guide on Study Participant Characteristics and Settings.
Studies Rated Moderate
Study 14204Trout, A. L., Tyler, P., M., Stewart, M. C., & Epstein, M. H. (2012). On the Way Home: Program description and preliminary findings. Children and Youth Services Review, 34(6), 1115-1120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.01.046
Trout, A. L., Lambert, M. C., Epstein, M. H., Tyler, P., Thompson, R. W., Stewart, M., & Daly, D. L. (2013). Comparison of On the Way Home aftercare supports to traditional care following discharge from a residential setting: A pilot randomized controlled trial. Child Welfare, 92(3), 27-45. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24818429/
This study was conducted in a usual care or practice setting (Handbook Section 6.2.2)Study 14206
Trout, A. L., Lambert, M. C., Thompson, R., Duppong, K. H., & Tyler, P. (2020). On the Way Home: Promoting caregiver empowerment, self-efficacy, and adolescent stability during family reunification following placements in residential care. Residential Treatment for Children and Youth, 37(4), 269-292. https://doi.org/10.1080/0886571X.2019.1681047
This study was conducted in a usual care or practice setting (Handbook Section 6.2.2)