Development and initial psychometric examination of the home safety and beautification assessment in mothers referred to treatment by child welfare agents
Unintentional injury is the leading cause of death among children, with approximately 45% of injuries occurring in and around the home. Rates of home injury are particularly high in the homes of caregivers who are referred for intervention services by child welfare agents. However, there are few validated methods of home safety assessment available. The Home Safety and Beautification Assessment (HSBA) was developed to assist intervention planning specific to home safety and appearance in a sample of 77 mothers who were referred to treatment by Child Welfare Services. Exploratory factor analysis of HSBA items indicated that safety and appearance factors emerged across rooms in the home, and internal consistencies were good. For each room, the sums of assessors' safety and appearance intervention priority item scores were correlated with the assessors' global safety and appearance ratings of the entire home, respectively. The participants' overall room attractiveness scores were correlated with the assessors' overall room appearance intervention priority scores, whereas the participants' ratings of overall room safety were not correlated with the assessors' overall room safety intervention priority scores. Participants' scores on the Abuse subscale of the Child Abuse Potential Inventory, personal income, and education level were not associated with the assessors' home safety and appearance intervention priority ratings, suggesting the HSBA is assessing constructs that are distinct from child abuse potential and socioeconomic status. The results support the HSBA in a sample referred to treatment by child welfare agents. © 2015 American Psychological Association.
Chow, G. M.,
Benning, S. D.,
Plant, C. P.,
Development and initial psychometric examination of the home safety and beautification assessment in mothers referred to treatment by child welfare agents.
Psychological Assessment, 28(5),