The rapid expansion of home visitation services over the past two decades has sparked lively debate over the method's efficacy and structural integrity. Many reviewers find the current evidence base sufficient to justify continued program expansion while others find it inconclusive. Evaluators and reviewers that note limited or disappointing impacts often call for greater attention to issues of program quality and more modest expectations as to what can be accomplished through any single intervention. As with all thorny issues, multiple realities exist. The key question with regard to home visitation is not whether the collective body of information suggests that the average level of performance among participants exceeds the average level of performance among various control or comparison groups, but rather is whether program outcomes and quality are improving over time, and whether program expectations are becoming more aligned with what families need and communities can support. The purpose of this paper is to promote analytic thinking and use of evaluative research within the broader context of early intervention and the goal of continuous program improvement.