Two-Year Outcomes of a 211 Care Coordination Trial

Early screening for developmental concerns enables timely diagnosis and referral, yet many families face barriers accessing services. Prior work showed that early childhood care coordination could improve timely service connection. This study assessed developmental outcomes among children participating in a randomized controlled trial of Information and Referral Federation of Los Angeles County (211LA).

Participants, aged 21-42 months, were randomized to usual care or the 211LA intervention. Developmental and behavioral measures, including the Parental Evaluation of Developmental Status Developmental Milestones Assessment Level (PEDS-DM-AL) and the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), were collected at baseline and 24 months later. The sample included 499 participants, 250 in the 211LA intervention and 249 in usual care. Primary analyses examined changes in PEDS-DM-AL and CBCL scores over the 24-month period by study arm. Post hoc analyses compared family characteristics between intervention and control families who enrolled in services.

Developmental and behavioral measures showed some clinically insignificant change over time, but these changes did not differ by condition (expressive/receptive language skills mastered: P > .9; autism, attention, aggression, and externalizing behavior T scores: P > .4). Post hoc analyses identified potentially relevant imbalances between the treatment arms at baseline as well as in the subgroup that enrolled in services, with families assigned to the 211LA intervention being more likely to have a non-US born parent and a parent with limited English proficiency compared with families assigned to usual care. Intervention families enrolled in services also used telehealth more frequently and received a lower duration of services than those receiving usual care.

This study measured the indirect influence of service enrollment through 211LA care coordination on developmental outcomes. Although increased service enrollment through 211LA did not affect developmental outcomes, we hypothesize this may be because of several factors, including overrepresentation of a subset of historically underrepresented families in the 211LA intervention, suboptimal performance of our developmental assessment tool, and complexity of conducting a trial of this magnitude during the COVID-19 pandemic, which may have diminished the ability of this trial to demonstrate developmental benefits despite demonstrated service enrollment gains.