Practice Guides

More than a summary of the research, the Practice Guides translate the strongest available evidence into actionable recommendations to support local leaders in strengthening family services.

ACTIONABLE EVIDENCE-BASED RECOMMENDATIONS

To support effective practice and improve how services for children and families are commissioned, developed and delivered.

Mentoring and Befriending Practice Guide

This Practice Guide has been produced to help senior leaders, in local authorities and third sector organisations, to commission and expand the availability of evidence-based mentoring and befriending programmes that have been found to improve outcomes for children and young people.

Parenting Through Adversity Practice Guide (0–10)

This Practice Guide sets out key principles and recommendations on parenting support for who have babies and children aged between 0 and 10 years old, based on the best available evidence.

Kinship Care

This guide for senior local leaders outlines the key principles and recommendations proven to be most effective to support kinship families, and the strength of the evidence behind them.

ACTIONABLE EVIDENCE-BASED RECOMMENDATIONS

To support effective practice and improve how services for children and families are commissioned, developed and delivered.
Latest

Mentoring and Befriending Practice Guide

This Practice Guide has been produced to help senior leaders, in local authorities and third sector organisations, to commission and expand the availability of evidence-based mentoring and befriending programmes that have been found to improve outcomes for children and young people.

Parenting Through Adversity Practice Guide (0–10)

This Practice Guide sets out key principles and recommendations on parenting support for who have babies and children aged between 0 and 10 years old, based on the best available evidence.

Kinship Care

This guide for senior local leaders outlines the key principles and recommendations proven to be most effective to support kinship families, and the strength of the evidence behind them.

How to use the Practice Guides

Find out how to use the Practice Guides, what information can be found in them, and how they can be used to support effective practice and strengthen local services.

Meet our Guidance Writing Advisory Group

By contributing a range of skills, knowledge and expertise, the Guidance Writing Advisory Group plays a vital role in ensuring the Practice Guides are robust, relevant and useful.

Cath McEvoy-Carr

Louise Spragg

Rasheed Pendry

Richard Cooke

Other Resources

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Cost ratings:

This rating is based on information that programme providers have supplied about the components and requirements of their programme. Based on this information, EIF rates programmes on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 indicates the least resource-intensive programmes and 5 the most resource-intensive. 

1: A rating of 1 indicates that a programmes has a low cost to set up and deliver, compared with other interventions reviewed by EIF. This is equivalent to an estimated unit cost of less than £100.

2: A rating of 2 indicates that a programme has a medium-low cost to set up and deliver, compared with other interventions reviewed by EIF. This is equivalent to an estimated unit cost of £100–£499.

3: A rating of 3 indicates that a programme has a medium cost to set up and deliver, compared with other interventions reviewed by EIF. This is equivalent to an estimated unit cost of £500–£999.

4: A rating of 4 indicates that a programme has a medium-high cost to set up and deliver, compared with other interventions reviewed by EIF. This is equivalent to an estimated unit cost of £1,000–£2,000.

5: A rating of 5 indicates that a programme has a high cost to set up and deliver, compared with other interventions reviewed by EIF. This is equivalent to an estimated unit cost of more than £2,000.

Child Outcomes:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus.

Supporting children’s mental health and wellbeing: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing child maltreatment: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Enhancing school achievement & employment: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing crime, violence and antisocial behaviour: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing substance abuse: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing risky sexual behaviour & teen pregnancy: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing obesity and promoting healthy physical development: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Evidence ratings:

The evidence ratings distinguish five levels of strength of evidence. This is not a rating of the scale of impact but of the degree to which a programme has been shown to have a positive, causal impact on specific child outcomes.

Level 2: Recognises programmes with preliminary evidence of improving a child outcome, but where an assumption of causal impact cannot be drawn.

Level 2+: The programme will have observed a significant positive child outcome in an evaluation meeting all of the criteria for a level 2 evaluation, but also involving a treatment and comparison group. There is baseline equivalence between the treatment and comparison‐group participants on key demographic variables of interest to the study and baseline measures of outcomes (when feasible).

Level 3: Recognises programmes with evidence of a short-term positive impact from at least one rigorous evaluation – that is, where a judgment about causality can be made.

Level 3+: The programme will have obtained evidence of a significant positive child outcome through an efficacy study, but may also have additional consistent positive evidence from other evaluations (occurring under ideal circumstances or real world settings) that do not meet this criteria, thus keeping it from receiving an assessment of 4 or higher.

Level 4: Recognises programmes with evidence of a long-term positive impact through multiple rigorous evaluations. At least one of these studies must have evidence of improving a child outcome lasting a year or longer.