State & Tribal Profiles

Michigan

Models implemented in Michigan included Early Head Start Home-Based Option, Family Spirit, Healthy Families America, Maternal Infant Health Program, Nurse-Family Partnership, Parents as Teachers, and Play and Learning Strategies. Statewide, 213 local agencies operated at least one of these models.

188,640
home visits provided
29,776
families served
24,962
children served

Ethnicity

10% Hispanic or Latino

Caregiver Education

24% No high school diploma

Child Age

59% <1 year

33% 1-2 years

7% 3-5 years

Child Insurance Status

99% Public

<1% Private

<1% None

Primary Language

95% English

2% Spanish

3% Other

Potential Beneficiaries

In Michigan, there were 513,800 pregnant women and families with children under 6 years old not yet in kindergarten who could benefit from home visiting. These families included 667,400 children.

667,400 children could benefit from home visiting

Of the 667,400 children who could benefit —

513,800 families could benefit from home visiting

Many home visiting services are geared toward particular subpopulations. The NHVRC estimated the percentage of families who could benefit in Michigan who met the following targeting criteria:

  • Child <1 20%
  • Single mother 27%
  • Parent with no high school diploma 6%
  • Pregnant woman or mother <21 3%
  • Low income 27%

Of the 513,800 families who could benefit —

52% of families met one or more priority criteria

23% of families met two or more priority criteria

NHVRC State Profiles present data provided by evidence-based models, which include both MIECHV and non-MIECHV data. This State Profile includes participant data from the following evidence-based models: EHS, Family Spirit, HFA, MIHP, NFP, PAT, and PALS. • Missing and unknown data were not included in calculations. • Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. • Public insurance includes Medicaid, CHIP, and TRICARE. • Low income is defined as family income below the federal poverty threshold. • Single mothers include single, never married mothers or pregnant women. • EHS data may be underreported. Data include EHS programs that provided home-based services only. EHS race, ethnicity, and primary language data include children and pregnant caregivers. EHS did not report home visits or families served. The number of children served was included as a proxy for families served. • Family Spirit reported children served, families served, and home visits only. • HFA reported primary language of caregivers. • NFP reported primary language of caregivers. • PAT data for child insurance status and primary language were not included. • PALS reported children served, families served, and home visits only.