Home  «  Program  «  Big Brothers Big Sisters  « 

Big Brothers Big Sisters (BBBS)

Scientific Rating:
3
Promising Research Evidence
See scale of 1-5
Child Welfare System Relevance Level:
Medium
See descriptions of 3 levels

About This Program

The information in this program outline is provided by the program representative and edited by the CEBC staff. Big Brothers Big Sisters (BBBS) has been rated by the CEBC in the area of: Mentoring Programs (Child & Adolescent).

Brief Description

Each youth is matched with a carefully screened and trained volunteer adult or high school mentor, and matches meet once a week at school (school-based program) or in community settings (community-based program). Matches can spend their time together talking, doing homework, doing crafts, playing games or sports, and in community-based matches, they spend time doing activities in the community like attending cultural events, going to restaurants or movies, or exploring other interests. Independent Big Brothers Big Sisters agencies provide support, ongoing training, and resources to the mentor (“Big”) and mentee (“Little”) to enable development of a positive and trusting relationship. Agencies may also organize activities or events for matches to attend. Agencies are responsible for obtaining their own funding and implementing their program based on the national Standards of Practice and Service Delivery Model. In addition to the foundational mentoring program, agencies may offer specific programs targeted at particular populations of children (such as Hispanic Mentoring, Native American Mentoring, Military Mentoring, or mentoring for children of incarcerated parents) or focused on particular activities or skill-development (such as workplace mentoring).

Goals of Big Brothers Big Sisters (BBBS):

Big Brothers Big Sisters partners with parents/guardians, volunteers and others in the community and holds itself accountable for each child in the program achieving:

  • Higher aspirations, greater confidence, and better relationships
  • Avoidance of risky behaviors
  • Educational success

Target Population: Youth aged 6-18 who may come from disadvantaged situations, such as single-parent homes, low-income homes, or homes with an absent parent (e.g., a parent in the military or a parent who is incarcerated).

For children/adolescents ages: 6 – 18

Essential Components

The essential components of Big Brothers Big Sisters (BBBS) consist of:

  • Every BBBS agency adheres to the national Standards of Practice, which include:
    • Governance standards, which guide the structure and oversight of the agency including strategic planning, fund development, legal compliance, and other governance issues
    • Human resources standards, which outline processes and policies required in the recruiting, hiring, retention, and development of staff
    • o Program standards (see below)
  • Aligned closely to the Standards of Practice, the national Service Delivery Model (SDM) guides how agencies engage with volunteers, youth, and parents or guardians to achieve safe, long, and strong matches with the best possible youth outcomes. The Program Standards and SDM include:
    • Child safety and youth protection policies
    • Use of nationwide technology platform for data collection and workflow
    • Outcomes measurement system
    • Volunteer screening, assessment, orientation, and training
    • Youth and parent assessment, orientation, and training
    • Pre-match presentation and approval
    • Youth outcomes development planning
    • Match support and supervision
    • Match closure and reassessment
    • Quality assurance

Child/Adolescent Component

Big Brothers Big Sisters (BBBS) was designed with a child/adolescent component that addresses the following presenting problems and symptoms for children/adolescents ages 6 – 18:

  • General at-risk individual or environmental.
Services Involve Family/Support Structures:

This program involves the family or other support systems in the individual's treatment: The child’s parent or guardian is considered a partner to the agency and the Big in a BBBS program. All agencies reach out to and involve parents/guardians in the enrollment process (including determining the best match for the child and providing input into developmental goals) and in the support and supervision of the match.

Parent/Caregiver Component

Big Brothers Big Sisters (BBBS) was not designed with a parent/caregiver component.

Group Format

Big Brothers Big Sisters (BBBS) was not designed to be conducted in a group setting, and has not been tested for use in a group setting.

Delivery Settings

This program is typically conducted in a(n):

  • Community Agency
  • School

Homework

This program does not include a homework component.

Languages

Big Brothers Big Sisters (BBBS) has materials available in a language other than English:

Spanish

For information on which materials are available in this language, please check on the program's website or contact the program representative (contact information is listed at the bottom of this page).

Resources Needed to Run Program

The typical resources for implementing the program are:

  • Insurance (general liability, Errors & Omission, Auto, Directors & Officers)
  • Affiliation dues ($3,500 minimum)
  • Office space, technology, furniture
  • Phones, utilities
  • Benefits, pension funds for staff
  • Staff salaries
  • Any specialized training for staff
  • Marketing costs, including potential volunteers and assuring a core of potential volunteers

Minimum Provider Qualifications

Staff qualifications vary depending on agency and specific staff role. However, the agency's enrollment and match support staff are required to possess a Bachelor's degree.

Education and Training Resources

There is a manual that describes how to implement this program, and there is training available for this program.

Training Contact:
Training is obtained:

There is an extensive curriculum of training available from the National Office, in addition to any customized local trainings offered by agencies. Training provided by the National Office includes a staff certification curriculum as well as orientation and training resources for volunteers, parents, and youth.

Number of days/hours:

Varies

Relevant Published, Peer-Reviewed Research

This program is rated a "3 - Promising Research Evidence" on the Scientific Rating Scale based on the published, peer-reviewed research available. The practice must have at least one study utilizing some form of control (e.g., untreated group, placebo group, matched wait list study) establishing the practice's benefit over the placebo, or found it to be comparable to or better than an appropriate comparison practice. Please see the Scientific Rating Scale for more information.

Child Welfare Outcome: Child/Family Well-Being

Show relevant research...

Grossman, J. B., & Tierney, J. P. (1998). Does mentoring work? An impact study of the Big Brothers/Big Sisters program. Evaluation Review, 22, 403-426

Type of Study: Randomized controlled trial
Number of Participants: 1,138

Population:

  • Age range — 10-16
  • Race/Ethnicity — 56.8% Minority
  • Gender — 62.4% Male and 37.6% Female
  • Status — Children who presented to the Big Brothers Big Sisters agency.

Location / Institution: Agencies in San Antonio, TX; Columbus, OH; Houston, TX; Minneapolis, MN; Philadelphia, PA; Phoenix, AZ; and Wichita, KS; and Community Partners for Youth of Rochester, NY.

Summary: (To include comparison groups, outcomes, measures, notable limitations)
Participants were randomly assigned to Big Brothers Big Sisters (BBBS) program or a waitlist control group; both groups completed both baseline and follow-up questionnaires. Questions were drawn from the Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment (IPPA), Features of Children’s Friendship Scale, along with project derived questions. Over an 18-month period, youths participating in BBBS programs were significantly less likely to have started using illegal drugs or alcohol, hit someone, or skipped school. They were also more confident about their school performance and got along better with their families. Limitations included differences in the length of time the mentoring relationship was maintained and the lack of an active control group.

Length of post-intervention follow-up: Varied (0-18 months after baseline).

Saintonge, S., Achille, P. A., & Lachance, L. (1998). The influence of Big Brothers on the separation-individuation of adolescents from single-parent families. Adolescence, 33(130), 343-353.

Type of Study: Matched comparison study
Number of Participants: 87

Population:

  • Age range — 12-17
  • Race/Ethnicity — N/A
  • Gender — 100% Male
  • Status — Youth with mother-headed single parent families involved in Big Brothers, youth with mother-headed single parent families not involved in Big Brothers and youth with intact families.

Location / Institution: Montreal

Summary: (To include comparison groups, outcomes, measures, notable limitations)
This study investigated whether substitute father figures can aid male adolescents from single-parent families with separation individuation. Twenty-nine adolescents matched to Big Brothers were compared with two control groups (adolescents from single parent families without Big Brothers and those from intact families) on relevant variables. Participants were evaluated by a French Canadian adaptation of the Separation-Individuation Test of Adolescence (SITA). Findings indicated that the adolescents with Big Brothers were less affected by parental rejection than were adolescents in the two control groups. They also appeared to have healthier narcissism than did adolescents from single-parent families without Big Brothers, but were more anxious when relating to male teachers than were adolescents from intact families. Limitations include the small sample sizes and the lack of randomization.

Length of post-intervention follow-up: None.

Rhodes, J. E., Haight, W. L., & Briggs, E. C. (1999). The influence of mentoring on the peer relationships in relative and nonrelative care. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 9, 185–201.

Type of Study: Randomized controlled trial
Number of Participants: 90

Population:

  • Age range — 10-16
  • Race/Ethnicity — 61.7% African American, 23.9% White, 6.1% Hispanic, 2.8% American Indian, 2.8% Biracial, and 0.6% Other
  • Gender — 54% Male and 46% Female
  • Status — Subset of the Grossman and Tierney, 1998 study summarized above - youth with a foster parent, guardian or extended family member as the custodial parent.

Location / Institution: Not specified

Summary: (To include comparison groups, outcomes, measures, notable limitations)
Note: Uses the same sample as Grossman and Tierney, 1998. The influence of a mentoring program (Big Brothers Big Sisters) on the peer relationships of foster youth in relative and non-relative care was examined. Youth were randomly assigned to either the treatment or control condition, and changes in their peer relationships were assessed after 18 months. Instruments used included a history of abuse-trauma, monitoring of mentoring relationships, parent report and Features of Children’s Friendship Scale. Foster parents were more likely than non-foster parents to report that their child showed improved social skills, as well as greater comfort and trust interacting with others, as a result of the intervention. In addition, whereas the peer relationships of all non-foster youth remained stable, treatment foster youth reported improvements in prosocial and self-esteem enhancing support, and control foster youth showed decrements over time. When the foster youth were differentiated further on the basis of their placement, a pattern of findings emerged in which treatment youth in relative foster care reported slight improvements in prosocial support, whereas treatment youth in non-relative foster care reported slight declines. All foster youth in the control group reported decrements in peer support over time, with non-relative foster youth reporting the sharpest declines. Limitations included differences in the length of time the mentoring relationship was maintained and the lack of an active control group.

Length of post-intervention follow-up: Varied (0-18 months after baseline).

Rhodes, J. E., Grossman, J. B., & Resch, N. L. (2000). Agents of change: Pathways through which mentoring relationships influence adolescents' academic adjustment. Research Child Development, 71(6), 1662.

Type of Study: Randomized controlled trial
Number of Participants: 1,138 (959 completed both baseline and follow-up)

Population:

  • Age range — 10-16 (mean = 12.25 years)
  • Race/Ethnicity — 56.8% Minority
  • Gender — 62.4% Male and 37.6% Female
  • Status — Children who presented to the Big Brothers Big Sisters agency

Location / Institution: Agencies in San Antonio, TX; Columbus, OH; Houston TX; Minneapolis, MN; Philadelphia, PA; Phoenix, AZ; and Wichita, KS; and Community Partners for Youth of Rochester, NY.

Summary: (To include comparison groups, outcomes, measures, notable limitations)
Note: Uses the same sample as Grossman and Tierney, 1998. A conceptual model was tested in which the effects of mentoring relationships on adolescents' academic outcomes were hypothesized to be mediated partially through improvements in parental relationships. The parameters of the model were compared with those of an alternative, in which improved parental relationships were treated as an outcome variable rather than a mediator. The adolescents were randomly assigned to either the treatment or control group and administered questions at baseline and 18 months later. The hypothesized model provided a significantly better explanation of the data than the alternative. In addition to improvements in parental relationships, mentoring led to reductions in unexcused absences and improvements in perceived scholastic competence. Direct effects of mentoring on global self-worth, school value, and grades were not detected but were instead mediated through improved parental relationships and scholastic competence. Limitations included differences in the length of time the mentoring relationship was maintained and the lack of an active control group.

Length of post-intervention follow-up: Varied (0-18 months after baseline).

Thompson, L. A., & Kelly-Vance, L. (2001). The impact of mentoring on academic achievement of at-risk youth. Children and Youth Services Review, 23(3), 227-242.

Type of Study: Matched control group
Number of Participants: 25

Population:

  • Age range — 10-16
  • Race/Ethnicity — Treatment Group: 92% White and 8% Hispanic. Control Group: 77% White, 15% African American, and 8% Hispanic.
  • Gender — 100% Male
  • Status — Participants were from a single parent home with one other risk factor

Location / Institution: Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Midlands

Summary: (To include comparison groups, outcomes, measures, notable limitations)
The present study examined the impact of mentoring on the academic achievement of at-risk youth involved in Big Brothers Big Sisters. Academic achievement tests were individually administered to 12 boys in the treatment group (i.e., had a mentor) and 13 boys in a control group (i.e., were on a waiting list to receive a mentor) before and after the program over a nine month period. Tests included the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement and the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test. Results indicated that boys in the treatment group made significantly higher academic gains than the control group, even after controlling for ability. Limitations include the lack of randomization, preexisting group differences, small sample size, and lack of female subjects.

Length of post-intervention follow-up: Varied. Posttest was administered approximately 9 months from baseline, when some treatment group subjects were still involved in the mentoring program.

Grossman, J. B., & Rhodes, J. E. (2002). The test of time: Predictors and effects of duration in youth mentoring relationships. American Journal of Community Psychology, 30(2), 199-219.

Type of Study: Randomized controlled trial
Number of Participants: 1,138

Population:

  • Age range — 10-16
  • Race/Ethnicity — 57.5% Minority
  • Gender — 62.4% Male and 37.6% Female
  • Status — Children who presented to the Big Brothers Big Sisters agency

Location / Institution: 8 agencies

Summary: (To include comparison groups, outcomes, measures, notable limitations)
Note: Uses the same sample as Grossman and Tierney, 1998. This study examines the effects and predictors of duration in youth mentor relationships. Adolescents were randomly assigned to either the treatment or control group, and administered questions at baseline and 18 months later. Questions were taken from the Inventory of Parents and Peer Attachment (IPPA), along with six-item subscale of the Self-Perception Profile for Children other questions relating to grades and attendance, school value, self-worth, and quality and length of relationships. Adolescents in relationships that lasted a year or longer reported the largest number of improvements, with progressively fewer effects emerging among youth who were in relationships that terminated earlier. Adolescents who were in relationships that terminated within a very short period of time reported decrements in several indicators of functioning. Older adolescents, as well as those who had been referred for services or had sustained emotional, sexual or physical abuse, were most likely to be in early terminating relationships, as were married volunteers aged 26–30, and those with lower incomes. Several dyadic factors were also found to be related to earlier terminations, including race, gender, and relationship quality. Limitations included differences in the length of time the mentoring relationship was maintained and the lack of an active control group.

Length of post-intervention follow-up: Varied (0-18 months after baseline).

Rhodes, J. E., Reddy, R., & Grossman, J. B. (2005). The protective influence of mentoring on adolescents’ substance use: Direct and indirect pathways. Applied Developmental Science, 9(1), 31-47.

Type of Study: Randomized controlled trial
Number of Participants: 928

Population:

  • Age range — 10-16
  • Race/Ethnicity — 60% Minority
  • Gender — 62.9% Male and 37.1% Female
  • Status — Children who presented to the Big Brothers/Big Sisters agency

Location / Institution: 8 Big Brothers Big Sisters agencies

Summary: (To include comparison groups, outcomes, measures, notable limitations)
Note: Uses the same sample as Grossman and Tierney, 1998. A conceptual model was tested in which mentoring relationships were hypothesized to reduce substance use both directly and indirectly through improvements in adolescents’ self- perceptions and close relationships. The study included 928 young adolescents, all of whom applied to Big Brothers Big Sisters programs. The adolescents were randomly assigned to either the treatment or control group and administered questions at baseline and 18 months later. Questions included the Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment, Features of Children’s Friendship Scale, the six-item subscale of the Self-Perception Profile for Children, and questions regarding alcohol and drug use. The hypothesized model was not substantiated particularly well with data from the entire sample, but was strongly supported when it was estimated with a subgroup of youth who were in longer lasting relationships. Being matched for longer than 12 months had significant impacts on the frequency of substance use and on parental relationships. Parental relationships mediated the relationship between mentoring and substance use. Implications of these findings for research and interventions are discussed. Limitations included differences in the length of time the mentoring relationship was maintained, the lack of an active control group, and the limited nature of the alcohol and drug use items.

Length of post-intervention follow-up: Varied (0-18 months after baseline).

De Wit, D. J., Lipman, E., Manzano-Munguia, M., Bisanz, J., Graham, K., Offord, D. R., ... Shaver, K. (2007). Feasibility of a randomized controlled trial for evaluating the effectiveness of the Big Brothers Big Sisters community match program at the national level. Children and Youth Services Review, 29(3), 383.

Type of Study: Randomized controlled trial
Number of Participants: 71

Population:

  • Age range — 7-14
  • Race/Ethnicity — 77% White
  • Gender — 51% Male and 49% Female
  • Status — Families who presented to one of 2 Big Brother Big Sisters agencies.

Location / Institution: Southern Ontario

Summary: (To include comparison groups, outcomes, measures, notable limitations)
This pilot study assessed the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the Big Brothers Big Sisters (BBBS) community match programs at the national level. Following a standardized protocol, 71 intake families (parents and children ages 7–14 years) and 30 adult mentors were recruited over 12 months from two BBBS agencies. Families were randomly assigned to the BBBS program or a waitlist control. Information on children's behavior and psychosocial outcomes was obtained from children and parents using face-to-face interviews and questionnaires administered after enrolling in the study (but prior to knowledge of assigned condition) and at 12 months follow-up. Questionnaires included Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire, items from previous research, the children’s version of the Centre for Epidemiology Studies Depression Scale, Hare Self-esteem Scale, Survey of Children’s Social Support, Elementary Level Student and Parent Forms of the Social Skills Rating System, Coping Scale for Children and Youth along with project developed questions. Analyses revealed non-significant group differences on most baseline measures. Results from measure where the child reported on himself/herself revealed beneficial program effects for five outcomes: symptoms of emotional problems, symptoms of social anxiety (fear of negative peer evaluations and generalized social anxiety and distress), teacher social support, and social skills (self-control). The study demonstrated the feasibility of an RCT to evaluate the BBBS programs. Limitations included the small sample size and the use of retrospective measures on the match relationship quality.

Length of post-intervention follow-up: Varied: 0-12 months.

References

Maldonado, N. L., Quarles, A., Lacey, C. H., & Thompson, S. D. (2008). Mentoring at-risk adolescent girls: Listening to ‘Little Sisters’. Mentoring and Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 16(2), 223-234.

Spencer, R. (2007). “I Just Feel Safe With Him:” Emotional closeness in male youth mentoring relationships. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 8(3), 185-198.

Spencer, R., & Liang, B. (2009). “She gives me a break from the world”: Formal youth mentoring relationships between adolescent girls and adult women. Journal of Primary Prevention, 30, 109-130.

Contact Information

Name: Salem Valentino
Agency/Affiliation: Big Brothers Big Sisters
Website: www.bbbsa.org
Email:
Phone: (215) 701-5651

Date Research Evidence Last Reviewed by CEBC: March 2012

Date Program Content Last Reviewed by Program Staff: January 2013