Intervention Summary
Big Brothers Big Sisters Mentoring Program
The Big Brothers Big Sisters Mentoring Program is designed to help participating youth ages 6-18 ("Littles") reach their potential through supported matches with adult volunteer mentors ages 18 and older ("Bigs"). The program focuses on positive youth development, not specific problems, and the Big acts as a role model and provides guidance to the Little through a relationship that is based on trust and caring. The Big and Little agree to meet two to four times per month for at least a year, with get-togethers usually lasting 3 or 4 hours and consisting of mutually enjoyable activities. Volunteers applying to be a Big are screened by local Big Brothers Big Sisters of America (BBBSA) agencies for potential safety risks, ability to commit the necessary time, and capability of forming positive relationships with youth. Approved volunteers undergo training, which includes presentations on the developmental stages of youth, communication and limit-setting skills, tips for building relationships, and recommendations on the best way to interact with their matched Little, whose racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic background may differ from that of the Big. In matching Bigs and Littles, BBBSA agencies often consider practical factors, such as gender, geographic proximity, and availability, as well as the match preferences of volunteers, youth, and parents. Volunteers indicate the type of youth they would like to be matched with, noting age, race, and the types of activities they expect to engage in with the youth. Youth and their parents state their preference for volunteers, noting such factors as age, race, and religion, and youth also provide their activity preferences. Matching policies may vary across local BBBSA agencies, but in all cases, the parent must approve the match. BBBSA staff and national operating standards guide implementation staff in screening, orienting, and training volunteers and youth and in creating and supervising the matches. The mentoring program emphasizes supervision to facilitate effective matches. For example, national requirements specify that organizations implementing the program must contact the parent, youth, and volunteer within 2 weeks of the match; maintain monthly telephone contact with the volunteer during the first year of the match; and maintain monthly contact with the parent and/or youth. In addition, implementers must contact the youth directly at least four times during the first year of the match; after the first year, contact with the participants can be reduced to once per quarter. Staff from local BBBSA agencies also support the match by providing guidance if problems arise in the Big-Little relationship. The study reviewed for this summary was conducted with eight urban BBBSA agencies and included youth ages 10-16.
The documents below were reviewed for Quality of Research. The research point of
contact can provide information regarding the studies reviewed and the availability
of additional materials, including those from more recent studies that may have been conducted. Grossman, J. B., & Tierney, J. P. Does mentoring work? An impact of the Big Brothers Big Sisters program. Evaluation Review, 22(3), 403-426. Tierney, J. P., Grossman, J. B., & Resch, N. L. Making a difference. An impact study of Big Brothers Big Sisters. Philadelphia, PA: Public/Private Ventures. Mentor Strength of Relationship Survey Youth Outcomes Survey Youth Strength of Relationship Survey
The following populations were identified in the studies reviewed for Quality of
Research.
External reviewers independently evaluate the Quality of Research for an intervention's
reported results using six criteria:
For more information about these criteria and the meaning of the ratings, see Quality of Research.
Mentors met with their assigned youth on a frequent basis (i.e., more than 70% met at least three times per month, and approximately 45% met at least once per week, with the average meeting lasting 3.6 hours), thus providing some measure of intervention fidelity. Attrition was relatively low in both the intervention and wait-list control groups, and both the baseline and follow-up surveys were completed by approximately 84% of the total sample. The study had a large sample size and used random assignment. There were no important differences in characteristics between those assigned to the intervention group and those assigned to the control group. The analyses used were appropriate and very thorough. A variety of multivariate and subgroup analyses were conducted, and intent-to-treat analysis was used. Only alpha coefficients of measures were used to establish reliability. Although face validity was reported for the measures, other types of validity were not. There was no discussion of missing data other than a narrative report by the study authors, who stated that there were very little missing data.
The materials below were reviewed for Readiness for Dissemination. The implementation
point of contact can provide information regarding implementation of the intervention
and the availability of additional, updated, or new materials. Big Brothers Big Sisters of America. Membership affiliation agreement. Philadelphia, PA: Author. Big Brothers Big Sisters of America including the following materials: Mentor Strength of Relationship Survey Strength of Relationship Overview [PowerPoint slides] Strength of Relationship Training and Fidelity [PowerPoint slides] Youth Outcomes Survey Youth Strength of Relationship Survey
External reviewers independently evaluate the intervention's Readiness for Dissemination
using three criteria: For more information about these criteria and the meaning of the ratings, see Readiness for Dissemination.
Extensive implementation materials are available online and provide detailed information on program implementation requirements, including the necessary budget, program policies, and organizational expectations. An affiliation agreement codifies these expectations, which require that implementing organizations adhere to the BBBSA policies. The program offers extensive online and in-person training, with curricula for staff and program managers. Self-assessment tools support quality assurance at various levels (e.g., individual staff, implementing organization). Training materials for mentors are difficult to identify on the program Web sites. Although strength of relationship surveys are available for youth and mentors, it is not clear how they should be used to improve the program or support continuing strategic planning efforts.
The cost information below was provided by the developer. Although this cost information
may have been updated by the developer since the time of review, it may not reflect
the current costs or availability of items (including newly developed or discontinued
items). The implementation point of contact can provide current information and
discuss implementation requirements. Descriptive Information
Areas of Interest
Mental health promotion
Substance use disorder prevention
Outcomes
1: Initiation of drug use
2: Aggressive behavior
3: School competence and achievement
4: Family relationships
Outcome Categories
Drugs
Education
Social functioning
Physical aggression and violence-related behavior
Ages
6-12 (Childhood)
13-17 (Adolescent)
Genders
Male
Female
Races/Ethnicities
American Indian or Alaska Native
Black or African American
Hispanic or Latino
White
Race/ethnicity unspecified
Settings
Other community settings
Geographic Locations
Urban
Implementation History
Big Brothers Big Sisters of America was founded to provide one-to-one youth and adult volunteer mentor matching through the Big Brothers Big Sisters Mentoring Program. Since then, more than 360 agencies in each of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Guam have used the program, which served 210,000 youth.
NIH Funding/CER Studies
Partially/fully funded by National Institutes of Health: No
Evaluated in comparative effectiveness research studies: No
Adaptations
The parent orientation guide has been translated into Spanish.
Adverse Effects
No adverse effects, concerns, or unintended consequences were identified by the developer.
IOM Prevention Categories
Universal
Documents Reviewed
Study 1
Supplementary Materials
Outcomes
Outcome 1: Initiation of drug use
Description of Measures
Initiation of drug use was assessed using a self-report item from the Big Brothers Big Sisters Outcome Survey: "Have you ever used any drugs other than medicines you may have taken for health reasons? Examples of drugs would be marijuana and cocaine." Youth responded to the item with "yes" or "no."
Key Findings
Ten- to 16-year-old youth were randomly assigned to the intervention group, which participated in the Big Brothers Big Sisters Mentoring Program, or to a wait-list control group. Data were collected for both groups at baseline and at the 18-month follow-up. From baseline to the 18-month follow-up, youth in the intervention group were less likely to initiate drug use compared with youth in the control group (p < .05).
Studies Measuring Outcome
Study 1
Study Designs
Experimental
Quality of Research Rating
3.0
(0.0-4.0 scale)
Outcome 2: Aggressive behavior
Description of Measures
Aggressive behavior was assessed using a self-report item from the Big Brothers Big Sisters Outcome Survey: "Since last month, have you hit someone because you didn't like something they said or did?" Youth responded to the item with "yes" or "no."
Key Findings
Ten- to 16-year-old youth were randomly assigned to the intervention group, which participated in the Big Brothers Big Sisters Mentoring Program, or to a wait-list control group. Data were collected for both groups at baseline and at the 18-month follow-up. From baseline to the 18-month follow-up, youth in the intervention group were less likely to engage in aggressive behavior compared with youth in the control group (p < .05).
Studies Measuring Outcome
Study 1
Study Designs
Experimental
Quality of Research Rating
3.0
(0.0-4.0 scale)
Outcome 3: School competence and achievement
Description of Measures
School competence and achievement were assessed using self-report items from two instruments:
Key Findings
Ten- to 16-year-old youth were randomly assigned to the intervention group, which participated in the Big Brothers Big Sisters Mentoring Program, or to a wait-list control group. Data were collected for both groups at baseline and at the 18-month follow-up. At the 18-month follow-up, youth in the intervention group felt more confident in their ability to complete their homework compared with youth in the control group (p < .01), and youth in the intervention group had skipped 37% fewer classes (p < .05) and 52% fewer days of school (p < .01) than youth in the control group.
Studies Measuring Outcome
Study 1
Study Designs
Experimental
Quality of Research Rating
3.1
(0.0-4.0 scale)
Outcome 4: Family relationships
Description of Measures
Family relationships were assessed using self-report items from two instruments:
Key Findings
Ten- to 16-year-old youth were randomly assigned to the intervention group, which participated in the Big Brothers Big Sisters Mentoring Program, or to a wait-list control group. Data were collected for both groups at baseline and at the 18-month follow-up. At the 18-month follow-up, fewer youth from the intervention group had lied to their parent compared with youth in the control group (p < .05). Also at the 18-month follow-up, youth in the intervention group had better relationships with their parent (p < .05) and more trust in their parent (p < .05) compared with youth in the control group; however, no statistically significant differences were found between groups in regard to communication, anger, and alienation.
Studies Measuring Outcome
Study 1
Study Designs
Experimental
Quality of Research Rating
3.1
(0.0-4.0 scale)
Study Populations
Study
Age
Gender
Race/Ethnicity
Study 1
6-12 (Childhood)
13-17 (Adolescent)
60% Male
40% Female
45% White
36% Black or African American
9% Hispanic or Latino
8% Race/ethnicity unspecified
2% American Indian or Alaska Native
Quality of Research Ratings by Criteria (0.0-4.0 scale)
Outcome
Reliability
of Measures
Validity
of Measures
Fidelity
Missing
Data/Attrition
Confounding
Variables
Data
Analysis
Overall
Rating
1: Initiation of drug use
2.7
2.7
3.2
2.8
3.2
3.3
3.0
2: Aggressive behavior
2.7
2.7
3.2
2.8
3.2
3.3
3.0
3: School competence and achievement
3.2
3.0
3.2
2.8
3.2
3.3
3.1
4: Family relationships
3.0
3.0
3.2
2.8
3.2
3.3
3.1
Study Strengths
Study Weaknesses
Materials Reviewed
Readiness for Dissemination Ratings by Criteria (0.0-4.0 scale)
Implementation
Materials
Training and Support
Resources
Quality Assurance
Procedures
Overall
Rating
4.0
3.8
3.3
3.7
Dissemination Strengths
Dissemination Weaknesses
Item Description
Cost
Required by Developer
Membership fee (includes standards of practice, affiliation agreement, parent and volunteer orientation guides, information for onboarding program staff, child protection materials, information for program performance managers, information on agency development for regional staff, and surveys)
Varies depending on site resources (minimum of $150,000 per year for 3 years)
Yes
Agency Information Management (AIM) System
$2,000-$12,000 depending on the number of youth served
No
Role-specific training for various levels of staff
Included in membership fee
Yes